Advertisement

President Biden is now openly calling for more social media censorship, saying, “I make a special appeal to social media companies and media outlets — please deal with the misinformation and disinformation that’s on your shows. It has to stop.”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2022/01/14/biden-calls-for-opposition-to-be-censored-n2601852

As a reminder, I recently linked to a commentary at Instapundit that outlined a legal pathway to suing Big Tech companies for violating conservative users’ freedom of speech. These companies claim that they’re not subject to First Amendment protections because they aren’t government entities. However, we’ve already heard reports of White House staffers meeting with these companies to help formulate guidelines for who gets censored.

In addition, as the linked article points out, Biden is also in violation of a 1973 SCOTUS ruling that the government “may not induce, encourage or promote private persons to accomplish what it is constitutionally forbidden to accomplish.”

As we’ve seen many times, the definition of “misinformation” and “disinformation” is often “things that the powers that be don’t want anyone saying, but that later turn out to be true” (see “Hunter Biden’s laptop,” to cite just one of many examples.) There is a legal case to be made that if these companies are colluding with government authorities to determine who gets censored, then they’re acting as de facto government agents. If so, then they are bound by First Amendment protections. If so, then “Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of lawsuits!”

And if the White House wants to claim it hasn’t been telling these companies who to censor, someone should inform the President not to go on TV and tell them who to censor.

Direct TV will reportedly no longer carry the conservative OANN (One America News Network) after its contract expires in April. Since that’s the channel’s major distribution outlet, it could put OANN out of business.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/01/15/directv-drops-the-hammer-on-oan-which-may-do-them-in-n507025

YouTube has temporarily suspended and demonetized Dan Bongino for spreading COVID “misinformation” for saying that masks have been “useless” in stopping the spread of the disease. Which is obviously ridiculous. Look at how well they’ve worked!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10407065/Fox-News-host-Dan-Bongino-suspended-YouTube-spreading-COVID-19-misinformation.html

MyPillow founder Mike Lindell claims that two banks are trying to force him to close his accounts, not because he’s done anything wrong financially but because they don’t like his political views and comments about the 2020 election.

https://www.westernjournal.com/mike-lindell-says-banks-gave-30-day-ultimatum-issues-defiant-challenge-instead/

And podcaster Joe Rogan is under assault for allegedly spreading “misinformation” about COVID. A letter stating that has been widely circulated that’s supposedly signed by 270 “physicians.”

But blogger Jordan Schachtel examined the signers and reports that he could find only about 100 of them who have qualified medical degrees, and most of those work at universities and don’t actually practice medicine. Of the two who co-authored the letter, neither has a medical degree. One has a masters and the other is a Ph.D. academic who researches psychiatry.

Last week, we looked at the charge of “seditious conspiracy” filed against members of the Oath Keepers and what that charge is actually supposed to mean within our legal system. Saturday, National Review published a commentary by legal analyst Andrew McCarthy in which he agreed that the charge of seditious conspiracy is not appropriate. We’ve certainly seen no evidence that Trump supporters --- at least the REAL Trump supporters, even those who entered the Capitol Building --- intended to forcefully interfere with a lawful exercise of government authority. Some have said they were trying to make a statement that they hoped the certification would be “paused” while certain irregularities were examined. They certainly were not trying to overthrow the government or anything close.

McCarthy, being the seasoned legal expert that we are not, was able to explain very precisely why “seditious conspiracy” is the wrong charge. It requires two conditions be met, he said: 1) that there is an agreement to use FORCE (not just “rambunctious” protest), and 2) that there is an attempt to wage war against the United States or oppose the LAWFUL authority of the United States.

And even if the actions that took place might be (wrongly) interpreted that way by some, it’s another thing to prove criminal intent. “Seditious conspiracy is the rare criminal offense in which motive matters,” McCarthy said. January 6, he explained, “involves people who committed serious crimes but believed --- however foolishly --- that they were saving the country, not waging war against it. Far from opposing the lawful authority of the government, they believed --- not irrationally --- that they were acting at the behest of the President of the United States.”

Here’s where I deviate significantly from McCarthy’s view of the protesters’ state of mind and Trump’s role in what happened. It WAS irrational for them to believe that President Trump wanted them to riot, break windows and vandalize the Capitol. Never did he “behoove” them to do such a thing.

Anyway, last summer, after the feds had set up what they called their “Sedition Task Force” (!) to address the events of January 6, 2021, McCarthy wrote that “the rioters will be punished appropriately, but not punished as if they were terrorists who were trying to overthrow the United States government.” Au contraire. That is exactly what the Biden administration is trying to do now. In fact, the last time a charge of sedition was made, it was against actual Islamic terrorists with bombs.

As it happens, McCarthy himself prosecuted that case, in 1995, against the Blind Sheikh’s jihadist cell after their bombing attempt on the World Trade Center and a later plot to bomb other New York City landmarks. Our current administration is trying to put the very same label of “seditious conspirator” on Trump supporters upset at what looked to them like blatant election fraud. They were expressing opposition to something they clearly believed was unlawful.

A bit of history: The law against sedition was first codified during the Civil War, to target Confederate sympathizers in the North who were helping the South –- a very different situation, with people literally at war with each other. “Our sedition law is designed to address conspiracies formed by anti-American enemies to attack our country and its government in an unambiguously hostile and violent manner,” McCarthy explained. The terrorists I prosecuted, in the course of plotting and conducting mass-murder attacks, were willfully at war with the United States and said so unabashedly. That is not true of the January 6 rioters.”

“Let’s be real,” McCarthy wrote in June. “With due respect to Attorney General Merrick Garland, the Capitol melee is by no stretch of the imagination the greatest threat to our democracy in living memory. It is not 9/11. It is not the Boston Marathon bombing. Indeed, the June 14, 2017, Washington baseball field shooting spree, in which a radical leftist tried to mass-murder much of the Republican congressional delegation, bore more hallmarks of a terrorist attack --- albeit one that, like the deadly Black Lives Matter riots of last summer, the media-Democrat complex always remembers to forget.”

McCarthy did note “forcible entry, vandalism, and some theft of government property” on the part of some Capitol Hill rioters. He called it “a national disgrace.” At that time, some charges had already been filed and some participants had pleaded guilty, but none of this involved sedition. Oath Keepers founder Jon Ryan Schaffer had pleaded guilty to two charges: 1) obstructing a congressional proceeding, and 2) trespassing on restricted federal grounds while armed with a dangerous weapon (bear spray, which there is no claim that he actually used).

Last summer, McCarthy blamed President Trump for the riot, and he still does, as he sees Trump as responsible for making his supporters believe Biden hadn’t really won the election. I disagree, believing people are responsible for their own foolishness. If we’re going to attribute their anger to some outside force, how about the courts, for refusing to look at the evidence? Whether or not Trump had said the election was stolen, we saw enough jaw-dropping irregularities –- just on election night –-to generate enormous doubts. In fact, those doubts have grown with time, in part because of the stunning lack of transparency regarding the process, with over half of Americans now suspecting there was enough interference to change the outcome. Taking that “pause” would have been a good thing, instead of pushing ahead to formalize a "win" that millions of people saw as a likely fraud.

Finally, if you haven’t yet seen the documentary film CAPITOL PUNISHMENT, about the events and aftermath of January 6, I highly recommend you watch that. Nick Searcy, who was there that day and stars in the film, was a guest on my TBN show this weekend, and we had a great discussion. The film has lots of amazing “you-are-there” video from that day and interviews held later with participants who describe the shocking FBI raids they and their families endured, in which they really were treated like terrorists. There’s an enlightening segment on Ashli Babbitt, including video of her smiling and happy on her way to the Capitol just a short time before she was killed, and an interview with her husband that is not to be missed.

https://capitolpunishmentthemovie.com

The NCAA has relented and will consider unvaccinated athletes who’ve had a documented case of COVID in the past 90 days as “fully vaccinated” so they can participate in the basketball playoffs.

https://trendingpolitics.com/breaking-a-return-to-sanity-ncaa-to-allow-those-w-covid-herd-immunity-to-participate-in-sporting-activities-ethom/

This may defy the continuing narrative that ignores the efficacy of natural immunity, but it makes sense. A recent study found that natural immunity provides 90% protection against previous versions of COVID and nearly 60% protection against reinfection with the Omicron variant, which is still better than the protection vaccination provides. It was also found to provide “robust” protection against hospitalization and death from all known variants.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.05.22268782v1

But why the 90-day limit? Another recent study found that while natural immunity does wane a bit over time, it’s still protecting people better from reinfection and hospitalization than the vaccines, even when infection happened as long ago as March 2020.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

The linked story at Trending Politics theorizes that this 90-day timeframe still allows any athlete who tests positive in the next 90 days to play, which will save March Madness, the NCAA’s biggest money maker. Even if so, in this case, “following the money” might actually result in the NCAA following the science better than some people who claim to follow the science are.

Biden's Brain

January 18, 2022

Some people have expressed concern about the faltering health of President Biden’s brain. And by “Biden’s Brain,” I mean the nickname that’s been given to his Chief of Staff, Ron Klain.

Last week, the Supreme Court specifically cited Klain’s retweet of a description of the OSHA mandate as being the ultimate “work-around” in finding that the Administration knew it was unconstitutional. You’d think that would teach him to think before pressing “Send,” or inspire his staff to hide his phone, but no…

https://www.westernjournal.com/ron-klain-retweets-ridiculous-analysis-bidens-inflation-crisis/

Klain’s Twitter account is a marvelous fantasyland where the economy is booming because inflation didn’t rise quite as fast this month as last month (actually, it’s even worse than the government admits…)

https://asiatimes.com/2022/01/worst-us-inflation-since-82-is-huge-underestimate/

…and there was a tiny increase in the labor participation rate! Of course, that might have just been from Amazon having to hire more workers to resend all the packages that are being looted off of trains in L.A.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/train-thieves-downtown-los-angeles

But as Ron Klain might tweet, that’s good news: we have full employment for thieves! And they’re reducing smash-and-grab store crime by eliminating the middleman and stealing merchandise right off the trains! Under Biden, even thieves are becoming more efficient! It’s the best of all possible worlds!

Mr. Klain had better hope his gross of pig lipstick doesn’t get looted off the train.

Despite the Supreme Court’s split ruling that OSHA doesn’t have the power to mandate vaccinations but the HHS can mandate them for healthcare workers, this court battle might not be over yet for all healthcare workers.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/maine-health-workers-latest-to-take-vaccine-mandate-to-supreme-court_4214387.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-01-16-1&utm

In a subscriber-only story, the Epoch Times reports that the Liberty Counsel has filed a brief with the SCOTUS on behalf of 2,000 health care workers in Maine who are seeking religious exemptions from the vaccine mandate. They’re using the same argument that succeeded in a Texas federal court against the Defense Department: if you allow for medical exemptions, people getting those exemptions pose the exact same risk to the state’s goals as those seeking religious exemptions. The virus doesn’t know the difference. So to allow secular exemptions and deny religious exemptions is unconstitutional religious discrimination.

I’ll keep you apprised on how this case goes. In the meantime, there are indications that support for vaccine mandates may be waning. For instance, there's this prominent person in the UK who says that considering that Omicron is a mild variant, Britain's mass vaccination effort is a "waste of time" and should come to an end. He says the government should focus instead on protecting the most vulnerable, such as unvaccinated elderly people.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/waste-of-time-to-keep-vaccinating-people-ex-head-of-uk-vaccine-taskforce_4216302.html

Now, before I get censored and demonetized for spreading "misinformation" from some quack, I should quickly note that those comments came from Dr. Clive Dix, the former chairman of Britain's Vaccines Taskforce.

Remember when liberals believed in “My body, my choice”? Apparently, that applies onto to abortions, sex and recreational drugs. If you object to taking a vaccine, even if you might have medical issues or already have natural immunity, too bad: you will submit or else. At least that seems to be the opinion of a number of Democrats in a shocking new Rasmussen survey.

https://summit.news/2022/01/17/poll-finds-close-to-half-of-democratic-voters-want-covid-internment-camps-for-the-unvaccinated/

The survey found that 29% of Democrat voters would favor the government taking children away from parents who refuse COVID vaccines, 47% favor a government tracking program of the unvaccinated, 48% think the government should be able to fine or imprison anyone who publicly questions or criticizes the efficacy of current vaccines (FYI: I don't even favor imprisoning people who criticize ME), and a majority, 59%, favor allowing the government to force unvaccinated citizens to remain confined to their homes at all times, except for emergencies. Fortunately, that last one is opposed by 61% of all likely voters, including 79% of Republicans and 71% of independents, both of which are still frighteningly low percentages.

But if you want to put anything COVID-related other than vaccines into your body, then may God have mercy on you, because the government doesn’t. Daniel Pisano has been on a ventilator at the Mayo Clinic in Florida for 28 days. He’s been given less than a 5% chance of survival. His family wants to try the FLCCC plan that includes Ivermectin, but the Mayo Clinic refused. His family went to court to try to force the clinic to let an outside doctor give it to him, but the judge denied it. They’re now left with no alternative but to leave him on a ventilator and hope for the best.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/kevindowneyjr/2022/01/16/family-fights-for-ivermectin-for-dying-loved-one-courts-say-no-n1549942

If you remember, President Trump signed the “Right To Try Act” that allowed terminally ill patients to try experimental treatments when there was no other hope. Ivermectin is on the WHO’s list of essential medicines, it’s been used on humans since the 1980s and it’s the 420th most-prescribed medicine in the US. Despite claims that it helps save COVID patients, the FDA and CDC deny its efficacy and say it’s not approved for treating COVID.

My question: even if there's no approved studies showing that ivermectin helps, shouldn’t a person have a “right to try” it when the only alternative is to gasp for breath on a ventilator and “hope for the best”?

Am I allowed to report on this? Six House members and Sen. Ron Johnson are demanding to question Maj. Joseph Murphy about the leaked report obtained by Project Veritas that, if true, would upend many official narratives about the origin of COVID-19 and the government’s response to it.

https://redstate.com/jenvanlaar/2022/01/13/sen-johnson-wants-to-interview-maj-joseph-murphy-about-documents-released-by-project-veritas-n506165

I wrote about this several days ago, and have been waiting to see if it would be picked up by the media. I didn’t present it as verified truth, but as a story that deserved further investigation because, if true, it would be a bombshell story about government lies and cover-ups involving the loss of millions of lives. So you’d think the media would be all over it. But the old days of reporters chasing after the story have given away to reporters looking nervously to their favored authority figures for permission to cover anything that might upset the official narrative.

This story bubbled under on conservative media outlets for several days before it finally gained enough traction for Congress members to demand answers. And so I ask again, in all sincerity: am I allowed to write about it without being censored by social media? You see, I’m old enough to remember that when elected members of both Houses of Congress were demanding answers from another government official about a bombshell accusation, it didn’t matter whether the accusation was proven yet or not. The very fact that Congress is launching an investigation qualified as “news.”

But I searched Google for the words “Ron Johnson DARPA Joseph Murphy,” and it returned only two hits: a statement on Sen. Johnson’s website and a story on the conservative site PJ Media. With all the vast resources of ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times and all the other media outlets, Google found nothing else about this story.

And they really wonder why the public trusts them less than a guy selling “Rolexes” out of his car trunk?