Big Tech’s Anti-Conservatve Putsch Mirrors its ChiCom Masters

Well, the Big Tech purge hit in earnest on Friday evening, as President Donald Trump’s account was banned from Twitter and Facebook, and those two Orwellian firms joined with Apple, Google and Instagram to purge thousands of conservative-leaning accounts under the guise of a joint effort to prevent the spread of disinformation. This is perhaps the single most blatant example of mass anti-trust behavior in the nation’s history and the government is powerless to do anything about it because Mitch McConnell refused to force the repeal of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act into the Defense Authorization Act last month.

But elimination of accounts on these leftist platforms was far from the extent of yesterday’s Big Tech putsch: Both Apple and Google notified the owners of Parler that it would also be cancelled from their platforms unless it adopts the same sort of highly-discriminator thought and speech controls used by Twitter and Facebook. Users of I-Phones and Google Pixel phones found themselves unable to download and use the Parler app, and that’s just the beginning.

Hilariously, Apple executives gave the following explanation of the company’s assault on Parler:

“We have received numerous complaints regarding objectionable content in your Parler service, accusations that the Parler app was used to plan, coordinate, and facilitate the illegal activities” at the US Capitol on 6 January, Apple wrote in an email to Parler executives. “The app also appears to continue to be used to plan and facilitate yet further illegal and dangerous activities.”

ummmm…what about Facebook, then? Facebook has been used to facilitate all manner of violent crimes, including the planning and execution of mass riots, an array of terrorist attacks that have killed hundreds of U.S. citizens, and a sad litany of too many rapes and murders to chronicle. If you can’t remember Apple issuing any similar advisory to Jeff Zuckerberg, well, that’s because it’s never happened.

All of this took place simultaneously with the delivery of a speech read by China Joe Potato Head Biden, in which he classified President Trump and all of his supporters as Nazis who deploy the Joseph Goebbels technique of the “Big Lie,” which of course just happens to be the Democrat Party’s main stock in trade.

Goebbels, of course, used the technology of his day to advantage his Nazi Party exactly in the same manner as the Big Tech oligarchs of today are deploying theirs in concert with the strategic objectives of the Democrat Party. The Nazis ended up murdering 6 million Jews largely unnoticed by the rest of the world in part as a result of Goebbels’ careful planning and propaganda efforts.

This is, of course, the kind of brutish crackdown on free thought and speech that we would expect to see from the communist government in China. That should come as no surprise given that every one of the corporations engaging in the putsch is a ChiCom client company. It has been glaringly obvious for years now that the ambitions of these exact companies to capture the enormous Chinese market was causing them to be conform their corporate policy actions to the demands of their ChiCom masters. And now, here we are with the entirely predictable ultimate outcome.

The GOP had four years to do something, anything, to crack down on the abuses of these tech monopolies, which became increasingly restrictive and overt throughout the four year term of President Trump. But, of course, the Republicans did nothing because most GOP members of congress don’t really see any problem with this kind of corporate behavior, and because those GOP congressmen and senators hate their voters every bit as much as the Democrats do.

President Trump created an account at Parler last night, and no doubt millions of his 88 million Twitter followers will do the same in the coming days. My own inbox is filled with request by friends to follow them over to Parler, along with other platforms like Gab, MeWe, CloutHub and others I’ve never even heard of. Thus do the Democrats and their Big Tech allies accomplish one of their main goals: To splinter the opposition into an array of competing factions.

Back in August of 2018, as it was becoming increasingly evident that the Democrats might be able to win a majority in the House of Representatives, I wrote about my hopes that President Trump would use his second two years in office to do an imitation of Teddy Roosevelt and clamp down on the growing threat to our nation that these Big Tech oligarchs represent. Unfortunately, the President, beset by all the controversies the Democrats and media kept swirling around him and having saddled himself with an Attorney General who was nothing more than a Deep State tool, failed as miserably as congress to take any real action in this arena.

Anyone who thinks a Biden Administration, with a very liberal Merrick Garland ensconced in the Attorney General’s office, will make the slightest move to rein in the brutish, un-American actions of these Big Tech monopolies probably also believes that China Joe was elected in a free and fair election.

Keep your heads on a swivel, folks: The assault on your freedoms is just beginning. This will only get worse.

This is perhaps the single most blatant example of mass anti-trust behavior in the nation’s history

No Shit!, if the shoe was on the other foot, things would be a whole lot different. What if a State Controlled by Republicans decided to just outright BAN Google,Twitter,Apple,.. from operating in their State for Anti Trust Violations? Shouldn't they? maybe everyone should read these laws:

Any company may, on its own, refuse to do business with another firm, but an agreement among competitors not to do business with targeted individuals or businesses may be an illegal boycott, especially if the group of competitors working together has market power. For instance, a group boycott may be used to implement an illegal price-fixing agreement. In this scenario, the competitors agree not to do business with others except on agreed-upon terms, typically with the result of raising prices. An independent decision not to offer services at prevailing prices does not raise antitrust concerns, but an agreement among competitors not to offer services at prevailing prices as a means of achieving an agreed-upon (and typically higher) price does raise antitrust concerns. Example: The FTC has challenged the actions of several groups of competing health care providers, such as doctors, charging that their refusal to deal with insurers or other purchasers on other than jointly-agreed upon terms amounted to an illegal group boycott. For a description of these actions, read the Overview of FTC Antitrust Actions in Health Care Services and Products. The FTC also successfully challenged the group boycott of an association of competing trial lawyers to stop providing legal services to the District of Columbia for indigent criminal defendants until the District increased the fees it paid for those services. The Supreme Court upheld the FTC's ruling in this case. 493 U.S. 411(1990). Boycotts to prevent a firm from entering a market or to disadvantage an existing competitor are also illegal. FTC cases have involved a group of physicians charged with using a boycott to prevent a managed care organization from establishing a competing health care facility and retailers who used a boycott to force manufacturers to limit sales through a competing catalog vendor.

In order to compete in modern markets, competitors sometimes need to collaborate. Competitive forces are driving firms toward complex collaborations to achieve goals such as expanding into foreign markets, funding expensive innovation efforts, and lowering production and other costs. In today's marketplace, competitors interact in many ways, through trade associations, professional groups, joint ventures, standard-setting organizations, and other industry groups. Such dealings often are not only competitively benign but procompetitive. But there are antitrust risks when competitors interact to such a degree that they are no longer acting independently, or when collaborating gives competitors the ability to wield market power together. For the most blatant agreements not to compete, such as price fixing, bid rigging, and market division, the rules are clear. The courts decided many years ago that these practices are so inherently harmful to consumers that they are always illegal, so-called per se violations. For other dealings among competitors, the rules are not as clear-cut and often require fact-intensive inquiry into the purpose and effect of the collaboration, including any business justifications. Enforcers must ask: what is the purpose and effect of dealings among competitors? Do they restrict competition or promote efficiency? These Fact Sheets provide more detail about the types of dealings with competitors that may result in an antitrust investigation. For further guidance, read Antitrust Guidelines for Collaborations Among Competitors.

If this action was done against Hollywood and the Fake News Presstitutes, the US Marshall's would have SEIZED THEIR DOMAIN already and Put them in PRISON for their Monopolistic behavior in direct violation of hundred year plus Anti Trust Laws

I’ve never used Faceplant or Twatter. I do use Google and YouTube but I could live without it. Eventually the powers that be will infect and control and purge any dissent with the help of their butt buddy government swine. When the chit comes down I’ll be ready to link up with other like minded people. In fact we’re already half or better there. I’m on the water board at our private water company and already Gruesome Newsome is waving fees for Covid hardships. There’s a fair amount of people taking advantage of this policy. It doesn’t help our budget though. I think the plan is to bankrupt us so a multinational company can scoop us up at a sale. Our aquifer is desirable because we’re the highest in our area and it’s reliable even in droughts. We’ve got a plan to defend it with our lives.

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.