Renee Parsons<\/span><\/p>\n Since Galileo risked condemnation by daring to oppose the Inquisition in 1600s, pursuit of free expression against entrenched authoritarians has always required brave souls<\/span><\/a> to preserve the free flow of information.\u00a0 <\/span>It was that unrestricted flow of information and ideas that ultimately became a core element essential to democratic theories of self governance as this country\u2019s Founding Fathers adopted in 1791<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n As the 2024 election approaches with threats of Monkey Pox or other WHO generated viral infections and a political partisanship that borders on a satanic pedophilia Marxist agenda, the US is facing its greatest assault on the concept of free speech by Federal government officials since 1783 when George Washington warned if\u00a0 <\/span>\u201cFreedom of Speech may be taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter<\/i>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n The current attacks on free speech has escalated to include the EU\u2019s brazen\u00a0 <\/span>Digital Services Act<\/span><\/a><\/span> with demands on Elon Musk<\/span><\/a> and threats of his arrest, followed by Telegram\u2019s Pavel Durov arrested in Paris<\/span><\/a><\/span> as well as Brazil\u2019s attempts to block X<\/span><\/a> distribution. \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/span><\/p>\n At the same time, Democratic Presidential candidate Kamala Harris, with a questionable claim as a \u2018natural born citizen\u2019<\/i><\/span><\/a> has yet to display any knowledge or about American history<\/span><\/a>, the American Revolution or the First Amendment\u2019s role on the Bill of Rights.\u00a0 <\/span>While assuring the DNC\u2019s joyful audience of grifters that \u2018my values have not changed\u2019<\/i> meaning that the virtuoso Eisen-Elias rescue of a debilitated womanlike amateur from her impulsive demise of sinking poll numbers may be futile.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n In an awkward CNN interview which defies fact-checking, Harris suggested that Elon has \u201clost his privilege and <\/i>that X should be taken down<\/i><\/span><\/a>.\u00a0 <\/span>The bottom line is<\/i> you cannot say you have one rule for FB and different rule for Twitter. The same rule has to apply which is there has to be a responsibility placed on social media sites; they cannot communicate to millions of people<\/i> without any level of oversight or regulation. That has to stop.\u201d<\/i>\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n In other words, Harris is suggesting a shutdown of the country\u2019s social media platform, or is she only referring to X?\u00a0 <\/span>It makes no difference; in either way she is suggesting an unconstitutional attack on the First Amendment.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n As if in response to Harris\u2019s warning, a review of Judge Terry A. Doughty\u2019s legal challenges<\/span><\/a> of 2022 against the Biden Administration and a bevy of Federal agencies\u00a0 <\/span>has revealed the depth of repeated collusion to stifle free speech<\/span><\/a> that has occurred between Federal agencies and certain social media platforms during the recent Covid-19 pandemic. \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Central to what was a massive information suppression campaign, Doughty cited \u201cThe government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly<\/i>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n The Covid-19 pandemic provided a convenient cover to obscure the truth of disinformation as it generated unsettled public questions defining scientific truth. \u00a0 <\/span>As a\u00a0 <\/span>troubling coordinated effort was introduced to silence dissident voices, to influence an election outcome and\/or to benefit Big Pharma sales of a problematic vaccine campaign, a fierce political health dispute continues to simmer today<\/span><\/a>. \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n In a further complication of First Amendment issues, state sponsored censorship moved beyond Covid as it attempted to coerce a new political standard for free speech.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/span><\/p>\n On August 26, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg sent a curious \u2018apology\u2019 letter<\/span><\/a> to House Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan in order to \u2018be clear about how the Federal government interacts with companies like Meta\u2019<\/i>. \u00a0 <\/span>It has remained somewhat of a mystery as to Zuckerberg\u2019s intent with sending the letter which became clear with reading Doughty\u2019s latest Memorandum. \u00a0<\/span> \u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/span><\/p>\n Zuckerberg went on to explain about being \u2018pressured<\/i>\u2019 in 2021 by senior Biden Administration officials although he failed to specifically detail or\u00a0 <\/span>identify what that pressure consisted of or how it would be applied to and by Facebook.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Zuckerberg expressed \u201ca lot of frustration when our teams did not agree.\u00a0 <\/span>I believe\u00a0 <\/span>government pressure was wrong and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it<\/i>.\u201d Again Zuckerberg <\/i>failed to identify when there was disagreement and any details of why he believed \u2018government pressure\u2019<\/i> was wrong.<\/span><\/p>\n Continuing, Zuckerberg further shed some enlightenment <\/i>that \u201cI also think we made some choices, with the benefit of hindsight and new information, we would not make today. I feel strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to administration pressure and we\u2019re ready to push back if something like that happens again.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n Moving on to the Hunter Biden laptop, <\/i>Zuckerberg wrote that \u201cIn a separate situation, the FBI warned about a potential Russian disinformation regarding the Biden family and Burisma which we temporarily demoted to fact checkers. \u00a0 <\/span><\/i>Zuckerberg went on to add that their policy had changed when the story proved to have no basis in fact and would not be demoted again awaiting a fact-checker\u2019s green light.<\/span><\/p>\n Of special interest in closing, Zuckerberg mentioned donations made by the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative which, he claimed, were \u201cdesigned to be non partisan, to make sure local election jurisdictions had resources to help people vote safely during the Global pandemic<\/i>.\u201d\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Zuckerberg went on to assert that \u201cDespite the analysis I\u2019ve seen showing otherwise, I know that some people believe this work benefited one party over another.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n What Zuckerberg did not mention in his letter was that $400 million nationally<\/span><\/a> was donated to <\/i>the <\/i>Center of Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) and the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR), both with deep ties to the Democratic party.\u00a0 <\/span>Each provided funds for door-to-door, Get Out the Vote campaigns in swing states like Georgia, North Carolina, Michigan and Wisconsin that benefited the Democrats.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n In a soon-to-be-released coffee table book, SAVE America<\/i>, Trump stated that Mark Zuckerberg had plotted against him in 2020 and that the Meta chief executive would \u2018spend <\/i>the rest of his life in prison<\/i><\/span><\/a> if he did it again.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/span>Trump went on to explain how Zuckerberg and his wife visited the White House as if they had a friendly relationship.\u00a0 <\/span>\u201cHe told me there was nobody like Trump on Facebook. But at the same time, and for whatever reason, steered it against me<\/i>,\u201d Trump continues.<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/span><\/p>\n While it has remained somewhat of a mystery as to Zuckerberg intent in the letter to Jordan, a review of Judge Doughty\u2019s most recent (3:23-CV-00381<\/span><\/a>) Memorandum Ruling to Consider Kennedy Plaintiff Standing further clarified exactly what motivated Zuckerberg.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n As specifically articulated, Judge Doughty prepared the Memorandum to determine if any of the Kennedy Plaintiff\u2019s (RFK Jr.,) (CHD) Children\u2019s Health Defense or Connie Sampagnaro (a professional health care provider) residing in Louisiana could claim Standing in order to further the Kennedy Plaintiff allegations.<\/span><\/p>\n In February, 2024, a preliminary injunction was approved in favor of the Kennedy Plaintiffs against the White House Defendants.\u00a0 <\/span>That case was then incorporated with Missouri v. Biden<\/i> on July 24, 2023 which was then pending before the US Supreme Court.<\/span><\/p>\n On June 26, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States dismissed Murthy v. Missouri<\/i> on the basis of Article III Standing; thereby leaving the Kennedy Plaintiff Standing to be determined. \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n At that point, the Fifth Circuit remanded the Kennedy Plaintiffs and Federal Defendants to file\u00a0 <\/span>Supplemental Briefs which brought the case to Judge Doughty for his decision on August 12, 2024.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Standing is required for this case to move forward before a final determination on its merits can be considered: in this case, the Kennedy Plaintiffs must demonstrate that they have encountered or suffered an injury attributable to the defendants\u2019 challenged conduct and that such injury is likely to be resolved through a favorable judicial decision.<\/span><\/p>\n For instance, in this case, the Court must make specific findings that a particular Defendant pressured a particular platform to censor a particular topic before the platform suppressed a particular Plaintiff\u2019s speech on that topic.<\/span><\/p>\n At that point, Judge Doughty began his review of each of the Kennedy Plaintiff\u2019s:<\/span><\/p>\n The Court found Kennedy likely to succeed in his suppression of content claim and with a substantial risk that he will suffer similar risk in the near future. \u00a0 <\/span>As a member of the \u201cDisinformation Dozen,\u201d the Government specifically targeted twelve individuals for spreading alleged disinformation regarding COVID-19.17 as well as Kennedy\u2019s role in forming the CHD, a non-profit group that was also targeted for alleged COVID-19 misinformation\u00a0 <\/span>relating to COVID-19 vaccines.<\/span><\/p>\n Some selected highlights from pg, 7 of Doughty\u2019s Memorandum:<\/span><\/p>\n In addition, \u201con May 1, 2021, Facebook, in responding to demands that the White House had made at a recent meeting, noted that in response to the White House demands, it was scrutinizing twelve accounts that were responsible for 73% of the vaccine information (the \u201cDisinformation \u00a0 <\/span>Dozen\u201d), and was censoring these accounts whenever it could, despite the fact that most of the content did not violate Facebook\u2019s policies.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n The White House responded that it was their position that Facebook \u201cslow down\u201d vaccine hesitant posts. [Id.] Facebook called this new policy its \u201cDedicated Vaccine Discouraging Entities policy\u201d and even suggested to the White House that too much censorship could reinforce the notion \u201cthat there\u2019s a cover-up.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n Selected highlights from pg. 8 of the Memorandum:<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n \u201cFacebook responded that \u201cvaccine-skeptical\u201d content did not violate Facebook\u2019s policies, but even though it did not violate Facebooks\u2019 policies, Facebook agreed to have the content\u2019s distribution reduced and to add strong warning labels.\u00a0 <\/span>Facebook further told Flaherty that despite content not violating Facebook\u2019s policies, Facebook would censor content in other ways, by preventing posts discouraging vaccines from going viral, by using informational labels, and by preventing recommendations for Groups, Pages, and Instagram accounts pushing content\u00a0 <\/span>discouraging vaccines.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n Selected highlights from pg 9 of the Memorandum<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cFacebook admitted that although the CHD\u2019s posts did not violate its policies, it would suppress content that originated from CHD.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n Selected highlights from pg 11 of the Memorandum<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cOn August 18, 2021, Facebook announced that it took action against the \u201cDisinformation Dozen,\u201d by removing over three dozen pages, groups and\/or Facebook or Instagram accounts linked to the \u201cDisinformation Dozen.\u201d The report further indicated that Kennedy\u2019s Facebook-owned Instagram account was taken down, but his Facebook account was not<\/i>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Highlighst from pg 13 of the Memorandum<\/span><\/p>\n \u201c(FBI) Chan further testified that 3,613 Twitter accounts and 825 Facebook accounts were taken down due to FBI reporting and\/or flagging in 2018 and 2019.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n Highlights from pg. 18 the Memorandum<\/span><\/p>\n
\n\u201cBased on his letter, he is either being disingenuous or did not do his due diligence on the people he gave money to<\/i>\u201d Hayden Ludwig, a Director at Restoration News told the NY Post.<\/span><\/p>\n