Facebook blasted by GOP lawmakers after backing Trump ban

It's bad enough when Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram ban you from their platforms, those decisions are made here in the USA like My Pillow. But when Facebook uses an oversight committee, composed in great part by non-American citizens because they don't have the guts to defy the First Amendment themselves, even the GOP sees they've gone too far and feels the need to stamp their feet and say something.

So Republican lawmakers actually pushed back a little. [I say 'a little' because the GOP is too gutless to actually do anything to prevent the left from using the U.S. Constitution as a list of suggestions.] They issued a finger-wagging warning to Facebook after its Oversight Board upheld the social media giant’s suspension of former President Trump on Wednesday morning.

“Facebook is more interested in acting like a Democrat Super PAC than a platform for free speech and open debate,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy tweeted.

“If they can ban President Trump, all conservative voices could be next. A House Republican majority will rein in big tech power over our speech.”

“Disgraceful,” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz tweeted. “For every liberal celebrating Trump’s social media ban, if the Big Tech oligarchs can muzzle the former President, what’s to stop them from silencing you?” He makes an excellent and important point, but Democrats keep touching the stove in case it cooled off.

Sen. Rick Scott of Florida added, “Big tech thinks it can control everything. Companies that censor Americans while giving brutal dictators a pass should not have free rein over your personal data to use for their benefit.”

Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn, who recently appeared on Fox News' "Gutfeld!" tweeted, “It’s clear that Mark Zuckerberg views himself as the arbiter of free speech.”

Actually, all of big tech views themselves as arbiters of free speech--look at how they silenced Parler. 

The Oversight Board’s politically-driven, unconstitutional and hypocritical move Wednesday morning affirmed Facebook's decision to remove Trump following the Jan. 6 incursion of the Capitol that the left blames on Trump. 

Meanwhile the left gives a free pass to idiots like Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Gov. Ted Wheeler (D-OR), Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan, and many more, for supporting rioters and looters and often allowing them to go free with no bail after their arrest for violent criminal behavior.

“Trump’s posts during the Capitol riot severely violated Facebook’s rules and encouraged and legitimized violence,” the board said.

Okay, Trump often sent out tweets and posts that would have been better off remaining in the jasmine of his mind, but he called for peaceful demonstrations and never implicitly called for violence like Maxine Waters did over the George Floyd shooting. 

When a reporter asked Waters what protesters should do, she replied: "We've got to stay on the streets and we've got to get more active, and we've got to get more confrontational. We've got to make sure they know we mean business." 

Were Trump''s words worse than Waters'? Not even close, but Facebook and Twitter have different rules for Republicans and conservatives than they do for progressives, socialists, communists [but I repeat myself] and even nations that sponsor terrorism such as Iran. The latter group has much more latitude for saying whatever they want.

The hashtag #DeleteFacebook trended on Twitter on Wednesday morning as calls for users to delete their Facebook accounts increased over the board’s decision.

Facebook, Google and Twitter collectively control 90%+ of the internet, these giant monopolies must be broken up or regulated as utilities. #DeleteFacebook

— Melissa Tate (@TheRightMelissa) May 5, 2021

I miss freedom…#DeleteFacebook pic.twitter.com/FIkgdW4MPm

— Dude (@TheHeismann01) May 5, 2021

Some posts retweeted a Mashable article that gave instructions on how to permanently remove your Facebook account. If you go that far, be sure that this is what you want to do. 

On Tuesday, former President Trump launched DonaldJTrump.com/desk, a new website that provides commentary similar to tweets, but is a one-way channel at this time. As it now stands, it doesn't appear to be a huge challenge to Twitter, but perhaps it will be in the future. 

For now, people can put Trump's posts on Facebook and Twitter, but don't be surprised if these leftists prevent them from being posted down the road.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every ad you click on, you help in the fight against the China virus.

Tweet

GOP tries to push bills allowing social media lawsuits to oppose cancel culture

GOP lawmakers in about 24 states are trying to push bills that allow victims of social media giants to be sued for policing content on their websites that doesn't comport to their political views. They are therefore taking aim at federal law preventing lawsuits against internet companies for removing posts.

The GOP has introduced bills that would allow for civil lawsuits against platforms engaging in what they term "censorship" of posts, which it most certainly is. Many of the lawmakers are against the deletion of political and religious statements, says the National Conference of State Legislatures. And in roughly two states, Democrats are calling for greater scrutiny of big tech and are sponsoring the same measures. 

The phone company is a platform and cannot be held responsible for what is said over their lines, and thus, cannot be sued. These social media giants are making the same claim that they are merely a platform, but if they are censoring content how are they the same as the phone company?

Former President Trump and the GOP in general, have gone after the federal liability shield that protects platforms like the phone company, or the comment section of a website, for two examples. There is no doubt that Silicon Valley is doing all the can to shut up conservative viewpoints and we are seeing this in other aspects of national commerce like the banning of certain books on Amazon and other sites.

And let's not forget that Twitter banned Trump on their platform and used the January 6th protests and riots at the Capitol as an excuse to do that. while Facebook gave him an indefinite suspension which is currently being reviewed by a semi-independent panel at this time.

Some people argue the legislative proposals are doomed to fail while the federal law, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, is in place. They said state lawmakers are wading into unconstitutional territory by trying to interfere with the editorial policies of private companies.

Perhaps these companies should not be private, based on their incredible influence on public opinion, to the point that they likely swayed the 2020 presidential election in Joe Biden's favor.

Len Niehoff, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School, described the idea as a “constitutional non-starter.”

“If an online platform wants to have a policy that it will delete certain kinds of tweets, delete certain kinds of users, forbid certain kinds of content, that is in the exercise of their right as an information distributer,” he said. “And the idea that you would create a cause of action that would allow people to sue when that happens is deeply problematic under the First Amendment.”

Niehoff makes a good point, but that supports the argument of breaking these tech monopolies up. Okay, we know it's complicated.

The bills by the GOP vary slightly but many allow for civil lawsuits if a social media user is censored over posts having to do with politics or religion, with some proposals allowing for damages of $75,000 for each blocked post. They would apply to companies with millions of users and carve out exemptions for posts that call for violence, entice criminal acts or other similar conduct, which of course, is unconstitutional.

The sponsor of Oklahoma’s version, Republican state Sen. Rob Standridge, said social media posts are being unjustly censored and that people should have a way to challenge the platforms’ actions given their powerful place in American discourse. His bill passed committee in late February on a 5-3 vote, with Democrats opposed.

“This just gives citizens recourse,” he said, adding that the companies “can’t abuse that immunity” given to them through federal law.

Part of a broad, 1996 federal law on telecoms, Section 230 generally exempts internet companies from being sued over content that users post on their sites. 

The statute, which was meant to promote growth of the internet, exempts websites from being sued for removing content deemed to be “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable” as long as the companies are acting in “good faith.”

And that, my friends, is the problem. Who decides what is "good faith?"

At the very least, Section 230 should be updated to ensure these powerful companies meet certain criteria before they receive legal protection. And they should NEVER be permitted to ban a sitting president elected by the people.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every ad you click on, you help in the fight against the China virus.

Tweet

Facebook execs discuss crushing First Amendment under Biden

You've got to love Project Veritas and their guerrilla journalism approach to uncovering the truth.

On January 31st, Veritas released a devastating leak showing Facebook (FB) CEO Mark Zuckerberg getting all moist over Biden's executive orders, calling them "important and positive steps," in spite of Biden's admission that the same thing Trump did with executive orders was dictatorial. [H/T Media Research Center]

Zuckerberg then went on to say that he looks forward to when "Facebook is going to be able to work together with this new administration."

Guy Rosen, a guy whose job is an oxymoron known as Facebook VP of Integrity, was also shown discussing how the company's cutting-edge technology could be used to target conservative speech, in contrast to the First Amendment. 

Rosen, who some believe to be a total crap weasel, described how the platform is trying to “limit the spread of content that could potentially lead to further civil unrest, further violence.” Translation: Rosen wants to suppress free speech by people with whom he disagrees because if they are allowed to say what they believe, Antifa and perhaps BLM, will become violent and blame their behavior on words.

Rosen went on to describe how FB is specifically targeting political FB groups:

"We have a system that is able to freeze commenting on threads in cases where our systems are detecting that there may be a thread that has hate speech or violence in the comments. These are all things we've built over the past three, four years as part of our investments into the integrity space, our efforts to protect elections.”

Meanwhile, these FB buttheads are not willing to ban actual violent leftist organizations such as Rose City Antifa as they remain fully operational on their platform with thousands of followers.

Other far-left leaders at FB made anti-free speech comments on the company’s future as well.

Roy Austin, FB's VP of Civil Rights [not a joke] believes that all company decisions should be "run through a civil rights lens,” including the use of advanced virtual reality technology to re-educate people [to believe what he and FB believes]:

“I wonder whether or not we can use Oculus to help a white police officer understand what it feels like to be a young black man who’s stopped and searched and arrested by the police. … I want every major decision to run through a civil rights lens.” [FB's civil rights lens, no doubt.]

There is no question that conservatives and their civil rights are under attack by the far-left and Big Tech [but I repeat myself]. Please consider contacting Facebook headquarters at: 1-650-308-7300 and demand they and Big Tech be held to account to provide clarity on "hate speech" rules that seem to apply in only one direction.

Anyone who has been censored should contact the Media Research Center and use their contact form, and help them hold Big Tech accountable.

Please consider subscribing to this free blog, Brain Flushings, and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every ad you click on, you help feed my backyard squirrel and help in the fight of the China virus.

Tweet