Skip to comments.Project Veritas Publishes Explosive Report Exposing Google’s Plan to Prevent ‘Trump
Posted on 06/24/2019 8:17:21 AM PDT by righttackle44
[Truncated Title: Project Veritas Publishes Explosive Report Exposing Googles Plan to Prevent Trump Situation in 2020
Project Veritas has released alarming new undercover video, leaked documents, and testimony from a Google insider revealing the tech giants plans to meddle in US politics and prevent a Trump situation in 2020.
One aspect of the report features undercover footage of longtime Google employee and Head of Responsible Innovation, Jen Gennai, arguing against Senator Elizabeth Warrens suggestion that the company should be broken up because a smaller company would not be able to prevent the next Trump situation.
Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but shes very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who dont have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, its like a small company cannot do that, Gennai says.
Gennai also says that Google has been working diligently to prevent the results of the 2016 election from repeating in 2020, meaning they are actively engaging in election meddling and working to elect someone from the Democratic Party.
(Excerpt) Read more at blabber.buzz ...
For more commentary on this:
Left wing bias by the tech companies has been well known and documented since before the 2016 election and yet the GOP does nothing about it. Follow the money and you’ll probably find another example of Capitalists selling the rope to hang themselves.
MASSIVE, MASSIVE, MASSIVE DEMONETIZATION of Google is imperative. That is very possible legislatively and, possibly, administratively. See how they like THAT meddling.
Gosh, these people are evil.
Good luck running that through the House of Representatives but there might be something the administration could do about in-kind campaign contributions.
Maybe they could get a court injunction against the activity if they can find explicit evidence of intent, which seems to be there? Whatever is done, must be done before 2020.
Also, whistleblower points out another huge legal vulnerability; Google presents itself as a platform (which must be non-biased), but is really acting as a publisher by censoring content. The legal violation is discussed briefly toward the end of the video. That is huge, because we don't need new laws. We need law enforcement to act.
And like, I love her but shes very misguided, like...
Like, um, like, um, you’re a dumb #### and how you have a prominent position at google is terrifying.
Nothing will be done.
Not only have states never given corrupt Congress the specific power to regulate competition among manufacturers imo, doing so a politically correct spin on the Commerce Clause (1.8.3) imo, but just the opposite, the Founding States gave Congress the specific power to grant temporary monopoly power.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries [emphasis added];"
"The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary, as distinguished from technical, meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction and no excuse for interpolation or addition [emphasis added]." United States v. Sprague, 1931.
From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]. United States v. Butler, 1936.
Regarding Congresss Commerce Clause powers, why should Congress be able to break up a large, US-based manufacture when it has no power to break up that manufacturer's foreign competitors, particularly if bribes from foreign competitors are involved?
Theres a fundamental constitutional problem imo with Congress granting a company temporary monopoly power in the form of patents, and then turning around and breaking up that company in name of competition, particularly when misguided, post-17th Amendment ratification senators like Warren are arguably trying to break big companies up to win votes to stay in power.
Corrections, insights welcome.
Remember in November 2020!
MAGA! Now KAG!
The face of the American Stasi.
Time to break up Google...
Ping to Semimojo.
What do you want the GOP to do about it?
The only obvious answer is to either ammend the 1964 Civil Rights Act or pass new legislation to make political view a protected class under anti-discrimination law.
If you want to deal with all of the consequences of that, fine. Lobby your representatives.
If you're rational and realize what a disaster that would be suck it up, speak your piece and see how your opinion fares in the marketplace of ideas.
Exactly. Like the super computer workstation I staged and prepped for that South Korean business, that I later found out was a Chinese connected firm. Oh well, they paid cash according to the sales manager. Lol.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.