BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Daniel Kimmage Deposition By MO and LA AGs Reveals State Department Was Funding Online Fact-Checkers to Censor Speech

gateway pundit ^ | 12/8/2022 | joe hoft

[antidemoncrat]

The Demoncrats ... I mean Democrats have pretty much weaponized all of the Government, Lame Street Media and the alleged Social Media

[semimojo]

So you admit they do it.

Government tries to counter terrorist recruitment? Sure.

I'd be fine with any steps they took to counter foreign attempts, here or in the foreign country, but in this case it looks like it was exclusively offshore.

Do you think the State Department shouldn't try to do that?

[Albion Wilde]

bump

[DiogenesLamp]

Government tries to counter terrorist recruitment? Sure.

Do *NOT* substitute your words for mine. The government commits *CENSORSHIP*. I am not interested in whatever it was they were censoring or why. People will always dream up what they consider to be sufficient grounds to censor someone *IF* they have the power to do it.

I'd be fine with any steps they took to counter foreign attempts, here or in the foreign country, but in this case it looks like it was exclusively offshore.

The topic is not about "foreign attempts."

The Topic is about the US government censoring public speech through the proxy of "private" corporations whom you claim have the right to censor speech.

We now have proof that the Government uses these companies as a "front" for their own government censorship, and as many times as you have harped on it, I do not believe you now think the Government should be allowed to censor people.

Or do you? Have you gone that extra step now?

Do you think the State Department shouldn't try to do that?

I do not think any government agency should be using private corporations to illegal censor American speech regardless of what the speech is about.

[semimojo]

Do *NOT* substitute your words for mine.

Let's review the record, shall we?

I said:

The State Department works with fact checkers to "...counter terrorist recruitment and state-sponsored propaganda and disinformation".

You replied:

So you admit they do it. Good.

To which I replied:

Government tries to counter terrorist recruitment? Sure.

No substitution of any words, let alone yours.

The topic is not about "foreign attempts."

Yes it is. Read the article.

Why do you think they're interviewing a State Department guy?

The Topic is about the US government censoring public speech through the proxy of "private" corporations whom you claim have the right to censor speech.

That may be your topic but the article is about the State Department's efforts to counter terrorist recruitment outside of the US.

You're free to ride your hobbyhorse all you want but if that's what you want to discuss you should pick a better article to comment on or post a vanity.