Posted on 11/11/2020 10:48:06 AM PST by Kaslin
Social media does not get to determine the veracity of a sworn affidavit any more than corporate media gets to determine who won an election.
If you thought Twitter’s censorship of reported Joe Biden family corruption or frequent flagging of the U.S. president’s tweets were isolated incidents, think again. Big Tech’s efforts to shield favored political figures and positions from scrutiny have only increased.
You and I can find ourselves branded with censorious labels even for sharing court documents containing sworn testimony, should the offending share touch any of a growing number of third rails. Today, the integrity of the 2020 presidential election is the greatest third rail of them all.
I found that out this week when I tweeted screenshots of the summary of a sworn affidavit, and a link to that affidavit, delivered by Detroit poll challenger Zachary Larsen. In the affidavit, Larsen, a former Michigan assistant attorney general, claims to have witnessed several disturbing instances of fraud during the vote-counting he watched on and after Nov. 3, 2020.
Read this sworn affidavit from GOP poll challenger, and former Assistant AG for Michigan, Zachary Larsen, on the alleged fraud he observed in Detroit. This is Third World stuff, and every American should be outraged if these allegations are true https://t.co/63nLXJxAZF pic.twitter.com/9WbamMw4Yc
— Benjamin Weingarten (@bhweingarten) November 9, 2020
The affidavit is part of a lawsuit pending before the Wayne County Circuit Court. Larsen is joined by several other individuals in the lawsuit, including an employee of the City of Detroit and other poll challengers, who likewise attest under penalty of perjury to a raft of alleged fraud and corruption during the vote processing and tabulating.
These people put their names and necks on the line in coming forward in our charged political environment. A court will now determine whether their claims are sufficient to merit adjudication.
Twitter, on the other hand, is in no position to do so. Yet after my tweet started circulating widely, suddenly the purported non-publisher stepped in and made its own ruling: “This claim about election fraud is disputed.”
It slapped this flag on the tweet. Retweets meet a warning. One can now only share the tweet by adding text responding to it.
Now, it is theoretically possible that my editorializing about the alleged corruption and criminality in the affidavit constituting “Third World stuff,” and that if it’s true, “every American should be outraged,” represent “disputed” claims to Twitter. Even setting aside that, by this standard, Twitter would be a sea of flags, I would not bet that was Twitter’s problem.
One can see Twitter’s real beef by clicking on its warning. This sends one to a page that begins with the note, “Voter fraud of any kind is exceedingly rare in the US, election experts confirm.” Twitter establishes this Official Narrative by citing press reports, tweets, and selective summaries of testimony from federal officials.
This Official Narrative is itself in dispute. Just this year we saw a case in which the board of elections in New Jersey’s third-largest city of Paterson threw out nearly 20 percent of the votes in a mail-in election due to fraud.
The U.S. Department of Justice also convicted a former Philadelphia judge of elections for perpetrating voter fraud from 2014-2016. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about the history of urban political machines knows such activity has been a sad fact of American life for decades.
Democrats lodged more than 100 lawsuits over the past year in an attempt to loosen identification requirements, increase the quantity of mail-in ballots, and widen the avenues by which they could be delivered. That is a testament to the concerns legislatures across the country have long had over voter fraud—concerns merited given the hundreds of other documented cases that have transpired.
Every American citizen should have an interest in unearthing such cases, seeing justice done, and ensuring policies are put in place to prevent future such fraud. Ignoring the issue does the country no good. It is manifestly credible that we confront it in the 2020 election.
But this argument about voter fraud is irrelevant to the tweet at hand. Twitter’s position has nothing to do with what an individual attests to in sworn testimony delivered to a state circuit court. Who is Twitter to be challenging these claims? Can it not handle any evidence that conflicts with its Official Narrative?
Then why hasn’t Twitter challenged any of the millions of other claims far more dubious, and from sources far less credible? Has anyone seen Twitter retroactively append a warning label to slanderous tweets about Russiagate, or any of the endless number of other debunked conspiracy theories meant to discredit and delegitimize President Donald Trump, or concerning Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s high school conduct?
Twitter has stopped putting on airs: It is a publisher with a very clear slant. That is the slant of our political–corporate-media establishment.
Big Tech shows us that establishment cannot tolerate dissenting views from its prevailing orthodoxy, whether about the 2020 election, the Chinese coronavirus, climate change, or myriad other issues about which reasonable people of good faith can have completely conflicting views.
Now, disinformation can of course harm society. Conservatives know this all too well given the information operations run against President Trump and those in his orbit over the last four years, and to this day in the rush to coronate Joe Biden “president-elect.”
But vesting total power in the hands of establishment gatekeepers to determine what is acceptable in the realm of ideas—as a potential Biden administration is telegraphing—would be infinitely more harmful. In a free and healthy society, all ideas ought to be allowed to compete. The good ones should ultimately prevail over the bad ones.
The turn towards censorship should be seen as an admission of weakness about the censorers’ positions. It represents a resort to force instead of persuasion—muscle over mind.
Those who claim to care about “democracy”—and we are a republic, not a democracy—betray their stated views in seeking to control the marketplace of ideas. Social media does not get to determine the veracity of a sworn affidavit any more than corporate media gets to determine who won an election.
More broadly, a society that suppresses legitimate viewpoints is destined to grow increasingly dangerous. It will be ripe with division, and could head for dissolution. Free peoples must grapple freely with ideas, or they are unlikely to long remain free.
All folks need to do is have sarcastic headers and they can fool the censors.
Call the Tweet: “Biden is our President” or something like that...
twitter: break it up!
It certainly looks to me that even though the evidence for electoral fraught is more than plentiful, Big Tech, enemedia, the Dem-Rats and perhaps the ‘intelligence agencies’ (with the likes of the Brennan types) are planning to tough it out as if they believe they can control the narrative and the direction. The question is, “is there a possibility that they’ve got the technology loops closed enough that they can do that?” Can they squelch the flow of information to the point where they can shut down all opposing views? Will we be waking up a week from now and find that the internet only is working for ‘them’? Will PDJT ever be able to get his ‘message’ out? Don’t want to sound too conspiratorial but may I suggest the possibility that they may think that they’ve put the pieces in place such that an opposition can’t even be mounted....
All of the notices on Facebook or Youtube videos are so Orwellian.
Nah, just pull the plug.
Please Copy and Repost! The Trump campaign is so busy now that we cannot assume that they are even AWARE of this!
https://noqreport.com/2020/11/11/data-deep-dive-on-dominion-voting-systems-offers-incontrovertible-proof-of-election-hack/
Please create a Parler account if you are on Twitter. Many if not ALL of the people you follow on Twitter have Parler accounts now. Really nice to generate the business for Parler (an uncensored company) and take away from Twitter.
Jack Dorsey ought to censor his stupid nose ring.
I do have a Twitter account but I don’t use it. Any email I get goes right into my spam folder.
Twitter is a joke .
I just was suspended today for using the term “Tyranny of the Majority“ in an argument in support of the electoral college. Twitter suspension=badge of honor!
Twitter is also censoring the #MaidenGate fraud.
It all started when a woman decided to check to see if anyone have voted under her maiden name: they had.
So, she tweeted about it. A hashtag (#MaidenGate) popped up and other women started checking if people were voting under their maiden names: they were.
Twitter has now suspended the person who discovered this (@SomeBitchIKnow) and is suppressing the hashtag.
This woman may have discovered the Democrats’ big secret source of fraudulent ballot registrations: women who have changed their name after marriage.
Ever wonder how the Republicans lost the suburbs the last few years, even though suburbanites tend to be more conservative than their urban counterparts?
All the videos on YouTube pertaining to the fraud have this cute little message stuck under them:
U.S. elections
The AP has called the Presidential race for Joe Biden. See more on Google.
Funny. I have lived over 50 years without ever once realizing the Associated Press was who determined the next President of the United States. I sure are stoopid, huh?
Is his increased facial hair and general unkemptness in his appearance signaling a descent into Howard Hughes madness?
Mail-in ballots have long been acknowledged by voting experts to be more susceptible to fraud and irregularities than in-person voting. This has raised concerns from President Trump and other Republicans about the integrity of national elections in November, which are expected to include a dramatic increase in mail-in ballots. If Paterson is any guide, it ought to concern Democrats as well.
Over 800 ballots in Paterson were invalidated for appearing in mailboxes improperly bundled together – including a one mailbox where hundreds of ballots were in a single packet. The bundles were turned over to law enforcement to investigate potential criminal activity related to the collection of the ballots.
The board of elections disqualified another 2,300 ballots after concluding that the signatures on them did not match the signatures on voter records.
Reporting by NBC further uncovered citizens of Paterson who are listed as having voted, but who told the news outlet they never received a ballot and did not vote. One woman, Ramona Javier, after being shown the list of people on her block who allegedly voted, told the outlet she knew of eight family members and neighbors who were wrongly listed. “We did not receive vote-by-mail ballots and thus we did not vote,” she said. “This is corruption. This is fraud.”
There were multiple reports that large numbers of mail-in ballots were left on the lobby floors of apartment buildings and not delivered to residents’ individual mailboxes, further casting doubt on the integrity of the election.
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.