Yet Another Article About Free Speech

.......because they're still attacking free speech

Dec 07, 2023

For the last few days, I’ve been diving deeper into the CTIL Files hoping to write a single article about the documents and their implications. However, it’s now clear that we’re getting information much faster than I can write about it, so you can expect multiple articles about the subject — I’ll try to keep them somewhat streamlined as I touch on each sub-topic.

Today we go over testimony made by Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger before the House Judiciary Committee last week — the first public testimony given by the pair since the discovery of the CTIL Files. You can find the full 3-hour video here, but I’ve collected just under 20 minutes of highlights below. (Not provided: hours of Democrats wringing their hands about Donald Trump.)

It seems like Matt Taibbi’s opening remarks are a great place to start:

I greatly admire Taibbi’s approach here — stressing this isn’t a bipartisan issue and that he’s voted for Democrats his whole life. (Ironically, he only started being smeared as “right-wing” when telling the truth became right-wing.) Taibbi brings up the (obvious) point that SOMEBODY has to decide what “hate speech” is, and such censorship ALWAYS expands. (And usually with the “authorities” being exempt from their own rules — more on that later.)

Later in the hearing, Thomas Massie (who’s rapidly moving up my list of half-decent politicians) grills “Former Aide To The White House Coronavirus Task Force” Olivia Troye about government-funded censorship flagging Tweets from official government representatives. In response, Troye employs the Fauci defense (“I do not recall/know anything about that.”) before ultimately coming to the conclusion that SOMETHING must have been wrong with the Tweet — otherwise why would it get censored?

After blasting Troye’s testimony as completely false, Massie moves on to the CTIL Files themselves and the origin of the group — former Israeli intelligence and former British intelligence working together (and with US military contractors) for the “good” of America. (Yeah, right.)

But let’s get one thing straight…..when the censors send people to argue for censorship, they’re not sending their best — they’re sending people like Dan Goldman. (Or maybe Goldman IS their best and they’re simply trying to defend the indefensible.) This video is a perfect example of a stupid person who thinks he’s smart but can’t move away from his talking points for a single second as he own-goals himself over and over:

“Only 35% of flags got censored! True things that violate Terms of Service should be removed! Russia used social media to interfere with 2016, so we can too! Hunter Biden’s laptop is fake!” (Somebody needs to update this guy’s memo a little.)

Shellenberger just can’t help himself (I wouldn’t be able to, either), and points out that Golden is actively engaging in a conspiracy theory while still violating the First Amendment by prodding social media companies to censor legal speech (and change the Terms of Service that Mr. Goldman seems to love).

After hearing Democrats drone on about the dangers of Donald Trump, Shellenberger asks the most obvious question in the history of questions — which it seems that Democrats have never even thought of:

The best way to evaluate any proposed law is to consider the ramifications of The Worst Person Ever enforcing it. If you don’t want Donald Trump to be able to censor you on social media, then maybe the giant censorship apparatus isn’t a good idea after all. (“NO! This is just one more reason we can’t let him win!” will be the obvious play instead.)

Today’s last video comes from Tuesday’s hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, and features Dan Bishop confronting Department of Justice Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clark. This one really must be seen to be believed:

Kristen Clark is a civil rights attorney pulling down some serious cash, and she’s completely unaware of the case exposing some of the biggest civil rights violations in American history? What are we paying her to actually do? Is Clark just an empty suit, paid to regurgitate talking points? For that matter, how many other Kristen Clarks are out there, leeching off taxpayers while contributing nothing?

That leads us perfectly into last night’s GOP debate — once again without Trump. The clown car is losing bodies, so Kristen Clark clone Nikki Haley got plenty of time to make herself the laughing stock of the stage:

I really don’t even know where to start with that statement, so I’ll just say that whatever the actual problem is here, censorship is never, ever the answer.

Not that I think we’ll have to deal with Nikki Haley for much longer, after she was (figuratively) murdered on national TV by Vivek Ramaswamy:

I love everything about this clip. For a brief, glorious moment, it seems like a politician might actually feel shame. (And Haley should!) I feel like the more time Vivek spends around the Swamp, the more he hates it. (I feel the same way!)

The last debate highlight features Ron DeSantis saying what we’re all thinking about covid:

Hopefully he means what he says, because a reckoning won’t come from one place — it must come from everywhere. Texas is already suing Pfizer, there’s no reason that Florida can’t do the same. We all know that when we force discovery surrounding covid, we’re going to find the “experts” ALWAYS knew the risks of mass “vaccination” of the public, they just didn’t care. (And those “experts” were often exempt, anyway!)

I’m going to wrap this up here, there’s a lot of video and I don’t want to take up too much of your time today. (Plus, Public just dropped another article discussing how the Pentagon was involved with the censorship. This is what I mean about too much information to keep up with!) In the next installment, we’ll go over the some of the mechanisms by which the censors seek to gain control, and dive deeper into “hate speech” laws being proposed around the world.

Sneak Peek: