By Exposing Hamilton 68, The ‘Twitter Files’ Proved The Deep State Is A Weapon Aimed Directly At You

In a recent addition to the “Twitter Files,” Matt Taibbi revealed to the public how Twitter — the preferred social media platform of politicians, academics, and journalists — co-opted the algorithmic blacklist of a bipartisan neoliberal propaganda outfit known as Hamilton 68.

Hamilton 68 was a digital dashboard that, as my colleague Emily Jashinsky recently discussed, was used to perpetuate and mainstream the myth of Russian interference in American politics through algorithmic censorship and suppression. 

But it wasn’t just egghead professors, left-wing activist journalists, and the tragically narcissistic (Adam Schiff) who perpetuated the thoroughly repudiated lie that Russia determined the outcome of the 2016 presidential election by hijacking the internet.

Hamilton 68 was of unique interest to the unelected members of the American government who staff the national bureaucracy and compose the federal civil service. It was — and likely still is — used by these bureaucrats on a regular basis to substantiate and launder bogus intel into the government’s policy-making narrative to further establish a rule of permanent bureaucracy and chip away at the democratic nature of the American republic. 

Amanda Milius, a former member of the Trump administration and the former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Content at the State Department, recently confirmed this when speaking to The Federalist.

Outsourcing Intelligence Makes Being Corrupt Easier 

According to Milius, from the day Hamilton 68 went online, senior officials at the State Department were elated because it enabled them to effectively outsource large swaths of their information sourcing for communications. Naturally, this was a huge time saver since “everything [was] 100 times redundant,” and having access to pre-sourced and verified intel from somewhere you trust while trying to maintain a fast-paced digital communications bureau with 24-hour access to the rest of the world would be a massive time saver.

Once the department began to process intel from Hamilton 68, they insisted that they could “use it as a tool to track all the Russian misinformation, which at that moment in 2017, was the shiny ball of foreign policy.”

Milius noted that with the election of Donald Trump, there was a distinct shift in the bureaucracy’s expressed priorities. Previously, the federal government had been preoccupied with the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), but along with Trump’s ascension to the presidency, federal agencies began to place a disproportionate emphasis on utilizing “public-private partnerships” to root out alleged Russian influence.

Another former senior government official recently suggested that information-based operations, a practice that in the digital era found its roots in the GWOT, was found to be useful in the domestic private sector as well. And this is likely how Hamilton 68 came into being. Individuals who had acquired specific skills while serving the country brought those skills home and began using them in service of political goals. 

And Milius’ experience with the State Department’s “bot detection” efforts that were meant to keep tabs on people spreading Russian disinformation online substantiates this. She affirmed that the public-private partnership between the federal bureaucracy and Big Tech, in particular, established a sense of comfort and familiarity between the two bodies. Because bureaucrats were able to “take free trips to Silicon Valley and hang out with people from Google and Facebook and Twitter,” the managerial elite in both entities knew they were operating on the same wavelength.

This additional face time likely provided both groups reassurance that their ideological goals were similar and that they would have allies in the quest to delegitimize and stonewall Trump’s presidency.

Swamp Creatures Tend to Be Lazy

Once Hamilton 68 came online, an inordinate amount of attention was placed on 644 Twitter accounts that were flagged as “bots” spreading “Russian disinformation.” Thanks to Taibbi’s reporting, it is now publicly documented that these accounts were overwhelmingly run by American citizens and other Western civilians with no connection to Russia whatsoever. But to people involved in conservative politics at the time, it was clear that Hamilton 68 was a con. 

“It was run by the teams that ran Russiagate, so this was yet another arm of their public attack on Trump and Trump supporters,” Milius said. “I was looking at the list of users, and I was like, ‘Bro, my secret handle is on there. Like all my friends are on there. I know these people. They’re not bots.’”

Milius stated that the individuals behind Hamilton 68 were directly providing “someone or multiple people” at the State Department with the lists of accounts being algorithmically monitored.

Such collusion would indicate the government was effectively taking orders from a politically biased third party about which private citizens it should monitor, suppress, and allow to be libeled by the corporate media.

And despite the fact that — as we now can deduce — the people behind Hamilton 68 knew what they were doing was fraudulent, the users who were algorithmically placed on these curated lists had information about them used to source not only news stories about a malicious foreign presence in American domestic issues but as the basis for intel used in reports within federal agencies. 

Furthermore, the data analytics included alongside Hamilton 68’s information were frequently drastically inflated to manufacture a sense of severity, Milius said, further indicating to her and to some of those with whom she worked that the entire operation was bogus. When data analysts in the State Department would compare the analytics provided by Hamilton 68 with the actual data from the monitored accounts’ traffic, they would find massive discrepancies, she noted. The people behind Hamilton 68 were blatantly lying, and if people looked in the right places the lies fell apart.

But because their numbers were few and leadership enjoyed the convenience of pre-sourced intel, Hamilton 68 continued to be utilized by the State Department. 

The Deep State Is a Hammer; Everything Else Is a Nail

Even Yoel Roth, the former head of trust and safety at Twitter, knew that Hamilton 68 was bogus. There is no reason to believe that GS-15s in the State Department had a good-faith reason to accept it at face value. After all, bureaucrats overwhelmingly favored Hillary Clinton in 2016, so why wouldn’t they take a chance at sabotaging someone they believed would lead the U.S. down the wrong path? 

Milius contends that the political bias of entrenched bureaucrats who make decisions in federal agencies played a key role in deciding to utilize a tool like Hamilton 68, subsequently prolonging the narrative of Russian collusion. 

“They wanted [Russian collusion] to be true so badly,” she said. “They felt like they were freedom fighters. In their minds, every Trump appointee was probably a Russian plant because, in their minds, Trump was a Russian plant.”

“The whole media pretended that this Russaigate thing was real. It didn’t just affect citizens. It affected everyone who worked in Washington, D.C., which includes everybody that worked with the [State] Department, the CIA, and more,” she continued. “These people were going home at night being told Trump and his people were Russian agents and then would come into work with the idea that they were going to save America from us.”

If Trump and everyone affiliated with him are Russian assets, and Russian assets pose an existential threat to the country, why wouldn’t a well-meaning new hire at the State Department who wants to grow in his career treat an intelligence briefing sourced from Hamilton 68 with the utmost importance if his boss told him to?

What Else Is Being Used Against Us?

Whether they were conditioned by their superiors and Big Tech or not, hundreds if not thousands of entry and mid-level bureaucrats perpetuated the lie the Russian government hijacked American politics. They, along with the corporate media and the universities, went along with this narrative to weaponize society against people — American citizens — who supported a democratically elected president from a major political party.

Taibbi’s reporting shows how Hamilton 68 was used by Big Tech and the corporate media to perpetuate the myth of Russian collusion by unfairly suppressing and regulating speech online. Milius’ experience at the State Department indicates how it was used to weaponize one of the most important parts of the federal government against the American people. 

Both narratives likely only give us a look under the hood. We know about the Hamilton dashboard — which is still operational, albeit under the slightly different moniker of Hamilton 2.0 — solely because of the “Twitter Files,” and we know of the use of Hamilton 68 at the State Department because of people like Milius who are willing to share their stories. 

We have no reason to believe Hamilton 2.0 isn’t being used by the government, nor do we know whether systems similar to the Hamilton dashboard are being used to curate lists of people on platforms other than Twitter. 

But we do know that unelected members of the government are weaponizing themselves against the American people in collaboration with the private sector as they chip away at our democratic republic. This is irrefutable.

So the question remains: what else is the U.S. government using to monitor its citizens while mobilizing against domestic targets who have done nothing wrong?


Samuel Mangold-Lenett is a staff editor at The Federalist. His writing has been featured in the Daily Wire, Townhall, The American Spectator, and other outlets. He is a 2022 Claremont Institute Publius Fellow. Follow him on Twitter @Mangold_Lenett.

Source

New Emails Suggest Twitter Misled Public On ‘Hamilton 68’ Data Pushing Russia Hoax

New emails released as part of the “Twitter Files” show the company appears to have misled reporters, politicians, and the public, allowing a high-level disinformation operation to fester in government and media. A comparison of emails uncovered by Matt Taibbi with the company’s public statements in 2018 reveals serious discrepancies.

This operation, known as Hamilton 68, was founded by former FBI agent and current MSNBC contributor Clint Watts. It functions as a digital “dashboard” where journalists and academics can gauge alleged “Russian disinformation” being spread by specific lists of people online.

Taibbi’s latest report on internal Twitter documents included emails from former Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth proving the company knew the anti-Trump dashboard was spreading false information that wrongfully classified Americans as Russian bots. This allowed the data dashboard to fuel false media and Democrat claims that President Donald Trump had treasonously colluded with Russia, hamstringing Trump’s execution of his presidential duties.

Taibbi discovered that Twitter “reverse-engineered” Hamilton 68’s methodology to recreate its highly publicized list of alleged Russian bots. Publicly, though, Twitter was feigning ignorance.

In a Jan. 3, 2018 email, Roth said his reverse-engineering proved Hamilton 68’s claims of providing data to prove Russian disinformation was festering on social media were “totally bogus.”

“They don’t know that we have the list, though, and they’ve refused to release it,” he wrote.

Roth recommended hitting the Alliance for Securing Democracy, one of the groups behind Hamilton 68, with an ultimatum: “either you release the list, or we will.”

The timeline here is important. Roth reverse-engineered the list on Oct. 3, 2017, and emailed it to his colleagues in a Google Doc. Over the next several months, Twitter employees repeatedly vented their frustrations with Hamilton 68 over email. The amount of media attention the project was generating created a public relations headache for Twitter, so they were eager to expose the truth about the dashboard.

Frenzied politicians desperately clinging to the Russia-collusion narrative started to pressure Facebook and Twitter in early 2018. When Republicans on the House Intelligence committee penned a now-vindicated internal report on FBI abuses, a hashtag that said “#ReleaseTheMemo” went viral on Twitter.

“When the hashtag went viral, [Rep. Adam] Schiff had a theory that it wasn’t the American public that was interested in abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,” Mollie Hemingway noted all the way back in 2018. “Nope, it was Russians! Secret Russian bots were trying to make it look like Americans were interested in FISA abuse against a Trump campaign affiliate.”

Citing Hamilton 68, Schiff and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, wrote a letter to Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg demanding their companies crack down on alleged Russian bots. Twitter responded with a letter defending its work to police foreign interference. An analysis of #ReleaseTheMemo, General Counsel Vijaya Gadde wrote back, “has not identified any significant activity connected to Russia.”

Worse, Gadde claimed Twitter could not evaluate Hamilton 68’s claims. “Because the Hamilton Dashboard’s account list is not available to the public, we are unable to offer any specific context on the accounts it includes,” he wrote. “There may be individual cases where Twitter accounts are operating within our rules but are included in the Dashboard. We have offered to review the list of accounts contained in the Dashboard and this offer remains open.”

Yet the emails Taibbi uncovered five years later show Twitter had the list for months before that point. Roth himself wrote, “They don’t know that we have the list,” three weeks earlier.

In mid-February, Emily Horne wrote, “we’re working extensively with reporters [off-the-record] and on background to explain the flaws in Hamilton 68’s methodology (without getting into our full knowledge of it),” before adding, “we have to be careful in how much we push back on ASD publicly.”

Horne’s concern, along with that of a colleague who was “frustrated” but understood the need to “play a longer game,” was that Twitter couldn’t kill critical media stories with off-the-record warnings if it didn’t also go public with what it knew. Both former Twitter employees now work in the Biden administration.

Hamilton 68 intentionally concocted junk science and concealed important parts of their methodology to bolster a narrative against their political opponents. The intended end result was to silence and discredit all dissent. A stunning number of journalists at allegedly top publications and even researchers at allegedly elite universities took the bait, as Taibbi’s story shows.

Twitter’s internal records raise questions about what key Democratic politicians like Schiff and Feinstein knew about Hamilton 68. Did Twitter brief them privately on its public knowledge of the list? Were any reporters briefed on that as well? Was Gadde seriously unaware that Roth had the list for months at the time of his letter?

The evidence suggests clearly that Twitter employees — who never counted on Elon Musk buying the company and releasing their emails — actively misled the public about a powerful political hoax.


Emily Jashinsky is culture editor at The Federalist and host of Federalist Radio Hour. She previously covered politics as a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner. Prior to joining the Examiner, Emily was the spokeswoman for Young America’s Foundation. She’s interviewed leading politicians and entertainers and appeared regularly as a guest on major television news programs, including “Fox News Sunday,” “Media Buzz,” and “The McLaughlin Group.” Her work has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Real Clear Politics, and more. Emily also serves as director of the National Journalism Center, co-host of the weekly news show “Counter Points: Friday” and a visiting fellow at Independent Women’s Forum. Originally from Wisconsin, she is a graduate of George Washington University.

Source

Elon Musk is Threatened with “Sanctions” at World Economic Forum

Elon Musk is Threatened with “Sanctions” at World Economic Forum


Elon Musk is Threatened with “Sanctions” at World Economic Forum

He must “Behave” and Stop Free Speech

BECKER NEWS

“The time of the Wild West is over,” the European Commission’s Vice-President for Values and Transparency Věra Jourová warned Elon Musk at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum.

Speaking with Euronews Next in Davos on Wednesday, Jourová said Twitter would face sanctions if it didn’t comply with the EU’s new online regulations.

Asked if the E.U. could force big platforms like Twitter to comply with the new online laws that aim to restrict speech and confine public opinion to state-approved narratives, she said that there was “nothing stronger than legislation in force.”

“We will have the Digital Services Act [DSA]. We will have the Code of Practice as a part of this legislation,” Jourová said.

“So, after Mr Musk took over Twitter with his ‘freedom of speech absolutism,’ we are the protectors of freedom of speech as well,” she claimed.

Jourová did not further clarify what she was talking about.

It isn’t the first time the E.U. has fired a warning shot at Elon Musk about allowing users to speak their minds freely on the digital platform.

Earlier in January, the European Commission warned Elon Musk that Twitter must do much more to protect users from “hate speech,” “misinformation” and other “harmful” content, or risk a fine and possibly even a ban under strict new EU content moderation rules.

Thierry Breton, the EU’s commissioner for digital policy, told Musk that the social media platform will have to significantly increase efforts to comply with the new rules, known as the Digital Services Act, which are set to take effect next year.

The two held a video call in January to discuss Twitter’s preparedness for the law, which will require tech companies to act as Thought Police on their platforms for content that the European governments find objectionable.

*********

(TLB) published this article from Becker News as compiled and written by Kyle Becker

Header featured image (edited) credit:  Jourová/Musk/orginal BN article

Emphasis added by (TLB) editors

••••

••••

Stay tuned to …

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Source

The Left-Wing Identity Crisis

The Left-Wing Identity Crisis


The Left-Wing Identity Crisis

Twitter’s open discourse a catalyst for mass public-awakening

.

The accumulation of irregularities in the MSM narratives are taking their toll on the sheep. The current combination of the Biden Docs scandal, the jabs not being “safe and effective” as promised, and the growing body of evidence that C19 was human engineered has caused an identity crisis amongst the Left.

Their entire personas revolved around masks, covid vaccines, and Trump being a criminal. Now they are being forced to rationalize that the “anti-vaxxers” and “conspiracy theorists” were right, and turns out Biden and the DNC are criminals. The pillars of their identity are slowly being proven to be a farce, and it’s breaking the cohesion of the Left and their followers.

Based on my observations, I believe we are in the middle of a mass-normie-waking event by accumulation. “Death by a thousand cuts”, “straw that broke the camel’s back”, etc., and it’s reaching a breaking point. Even many of the Liberal talking heads are struggling to continue maintain the charade.

This result is largely due to the public conversation being had, made possible by Elon freeing Twitter of Left-wing algorithm and bot manipulation. The normies are no longer shielded from public discourse like they were before. The comment sections are flooded with counter-arguments to MSM lies. Conservative voices are seeing increased exposure due to no longer being shadow-banned, and it’s making dividends in public perception.

Flashback circa 2017, there were very few Conservative voices in the mainstream, Conservative trending hashtags, and counter-arguments in the comment sections. Twitter is like a different planet entirely now. Elon leveled the playing field, and now we are winning pretty handily.

As for the normies, they appear to be very lost in their beliefs. Unsure what to think, what to believe, or how to act. The psychological trauma is inducing a “Fight or Flight” response. Most of them have opted for flight, going quiet/focusing on other distractions to avoid addressing the inevitable, leaving an opening for Conservative narratives to flourish. Some opted to fight, lashing out as a defense mechanism in response to their fear, amplifying the severity of their hatred for the Conservatives, creating more bulletin-board material for the Right.

In conclusion, Elon’s intervention into Twitter’s nefarious criminal activity not only exposed unprecedented levels of corruption within the government and private enterprise; it paved the way for truth and logic to reign supreme via public discourse, which resulted in a consistent stream of organic mass normie-waking, followed by the current watershed of awakening.

This outcome is what Elon means when he preaches “Vox Populi, Vox Dei” (The voice of the People, is the voice God). Allow the People to speak freely, and truth will out. The plan is working.

-Clandestine

************

Source

Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Source

WEF: United States Will Soon Make Hate Speech Illegal, Says EU Commissioner

WEF: United States Will Soon Make Hate Speech Illegal, Says EU Commissioner

The United States will soon follow Europe in implementing laws against so-called hate speech, a top Eurocrat claimed at the World Economic Forum’s meeting in Davos.

The vice president for Values and Transparency for the European Commission, Věra Jourová predicted on Tuesday that hate speech laws will be imposed upon the American public, despite longstanding case law at the Supreme Court protecting such speech under the First Amendment.

“Illegal hate speech, which you will have soon also in the U.S. I think that we have a strong reason why we have this in the criminal law,” Jourová said.

The Czech politician, who previously served as the European Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality, made the comments during a WEF panel hosted by former CNN host Brian Stelter on “The Clear and Present Danger of Disinformation.” The choice of Stelter may perhaps be viewed by some as ironic given his own relationship with the truth.

The panel also featured New York Times chairman Arthur Gregg Sulzberger, Democratic Congressman Seth Moulton, and Internews CEO Jeanne Bourgault.

Representative Moulton seemingly agreed with the statement from the EU Commission VP, telling her: “I think in general the US has a lot to learn in terms of data regulation, internet regulation… You’re way ahead of us in that regard.”

However, the Democrat politician later clarified that he did not believe that American politicians were ready to forsake the fundamental aspects of freedom of speech.

The comments from Jourová come amid the backdrop of the ongoing dispute between the European Union and new Twitter boss Elon Musk over his publicly stated commitment to free speech, which has ruffled feathers in Brussels.

Indeed, Jourová herself commented on the matter to Euractiv on Tuesday, saying that the platform should partner with the EU on combatting hate speech and disinformation, saying: “We need the platforms to work with the language to identify such cases.”

She said that European Union laws surrounding online speech will be enforced, saying: “They apply to Twitter regardless of who owns it. Musk should not underestimate our efforts to make big platforms responsible.”

“Regulators are already closely monitoring compliance with the applicable data protection rules, and we will be able to enforce the Digital Services Act later this year as well,” Jourová added.

The Digital Services Act (DSA) which came into force in November greatly expanded the ability of Brussels to police so-called ‘hate speech’ and ‘disinformation’ through the addition of punishment mechanisms against internet platforms that fail to abide by the bloc’s rules.

Should companies like Twitter fail to comply with the DSA by February of 2024, the EU will be able to impose fines of up to six per cent of their global revenue and even possibly ban the platform altogether.

Follow Kurt Zindulka on Twitter here @KurtZindulka

Source

Twitter Downsizing Data Center in Atlanta GA (Near GA Tech), and Shutting Down Data Center in Sacramento

Twitter Downsizing Data Center in Atlanta GA (Near GA Tech), and Shutting Down Data Center in Sacramento

Curious news about Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop, aka ‘The Twitter’, surfaces as the social media company announces that to save money, they will shut down the Sacramento data center and substantially downsize the Atlanta data center.

Oddly enough, the Atlanta data center is in the same regional complex as Georgia Tech University, which is the same university under U.S. government contract (think Rodney Joffe and the Trump-Russia Alfa Bank hoax) for cybersecurity research efforts.

[NOTE: Shortly after Twitter expanded its data center in Atlanta, on Nov 29, 2016, Georgia Tech received a $17.3 million contract from the U.S. Dept of Defense for “cybersecurity” research.  Three days later, Georgia Tech announced new collaboration with China’s Tianjin U, which hosts the APT hacker groups and is a partner of China Telecom and Huawei. Funny that, and you already know my suspicions, so I digress.]

(Data Center Dynamics) – Twitter is shutting down its data center in Sacramento, and will downsize its facility in Atlanta, Platformer’s Zoë Schiffer reports. The decision was previously rumored in November.

The company operates three main facilities in the US, with its remaining site in Portland, Oregon, expected to take the increased load. It is not clear if Twitter has done an analysis of the migration and whether the remaining servers can handle the load – when the Sacramento data center collapsed in September it caused a system outage. The move is expected to happen as soon as early January.

Twitter also has cloud contracts with Amazon Web Services and Google Cloud, but new owner Elon Musk is believed to be trying to renegotiate the contracts and cut expenses.

At the same time, he said that he plans to release new services that will require more storage and compute, including long-form high resolution video.

Former Twitter employee Sasha Solomon, who was fired after tweeting “sighhhhhhhhhhhhhhh” about Musk’s acquisition, responded to the data center closure report with: “Omfg like good luck when a failover needs to happen. So excited to see what 1-ish data center can do with all of Twitter’s traffic.” (read more)

This downsizing and reorganization of the background data-processing is happening at the same time the Daily Mail is discussing the financial viability of Twitter [SEE HERE].

Now, I don’t want to go down that rabbit hole again, but if Elon Musk was notified the US Govt was no longer going to subsidize the extreme data processing costs (coffee making), due to a lessening of the ‘national security partnership‘ per se’, then wouldn’t it make sense to start shutting down and downsizing costly data centers.

Just sayin’.

#Jack’sMagicCoffeeShop

Source

Journalist who scored legal win against Twitter to sue Pfizer and White House

Pfizer is being taken to court by journalist Alex Berenson for its latest legal and ethical violations.

Former New York Times journalist Alex Berenson this week announced his plans to sue both Pfizer and the White House for their respective roles in censoring his reporting about the failures of the Covid-19 mRNA injections.

“I will be going to court to fight back,” Berenson announced Saturday, forecasting an “epic legal battle over the way the government and Big Pharma used social media companies to censor debate” over the shots.

Berenson scored a legal win against Twitter in 2022 after taking the social media giant to federal court for banning him from its platform. His case survived Twitter’s motion to dismiss — an unprecedented legal victory that ultimately saw Twitter admit its mistake and let Berenson back on the platform.

This week, Berenson described that historic settlement with Twitter as “only the start” of his fight.

Hard Evidence of Censorship Conspiracy

“I now have hard evidence of the way the White House tried and ultimately succeeded in forcing Twitter to ban me — a violation of my First Amendment rights,” Berenson announced via Substack — “and how Dr. Scott Gottlieb, a Pfizer board member, participated in the conspiracy.”

The hard evidence to which Berenson refers came to light this week through Elon Musk’s Twitter Files. In the most recent cache of exposed documents, Gottlieb pressured a Twitter White House contact to censor physician Dr. Brett Giroir for the accurate claim that people with natural immunity do not need Pfizer’s product.

“It’s now clear #COVID19 natural immunity is superior to #vaccine immunity, by ALOT,” Dr. Giroir had tweeted. “There’s no scientific justification for #vax proof if a person had prior infection.”

In response, Gottlieb protested to his Twitter contact that Giroir’s post was “corrosive” and would “end up going viral and driving news coverage”.

Twitter flagged Giroir’s tweet, slapping a ‘misleading’ tag on it, which prevented most Twitter users from seeing it. The ‘misleading’ label remains to this day.

Another Pfizer Conflict of Interest

Gottlieb’s move represented an obvious conflict of interest. It shielded Pfizer’s credibility and profit margin while coming from a man with vast connections in Washington DC who is also a former government employee: Gottlieb was formerly the FDA Commissioner. Twitter staff even referred to Gottlieb as such in their internal correspondence.

Moreover, Gottlieb’s action against Giroir was only the tip of the iceberg in his conspiracy to use Twitter to silence Pfizer’s critics.

No ordinary Pfizer board member, Gottlieb is one of seven members of the Pfizer board’s executive committee and the head of its regulatory and compliance committee, which oversees “compliance with laws, regulations, and internal procedures applicable to pharmaceutical sales and marketing activities.”

Pfizer has a long history of legal and ethical violations.

A ‘Titanic’ Fight Ahead

“I am not exaggerating when I say this suit may be our only realistic chance to find out what Pfizer and the Biden Administration knew about the problems with the mRNAs in 2021, and how they may have schemed to push mandates and boosters on the public,” Berenson wrote Saturday. He continued:

This fight is going to be titanic. Pfizer and the White House will have essentially unlimited funds to try to deny me and these questions a day in court. They will do whatever they can to prevent me from reaching the discovery stage of the suit and unearthing their secrets.

Berenson’s announcement came just hours after the CDC and FDA acknowledged a possible link between Pfizer’s bivalent shot and strokes, which the CDC will now investigate.

It also came days after FDA vaccine advisers expressed disappointment and anger that early data about another Covid-19 booster shot wasn’t presented for review in 2022.

Thank the Source

Yes Virginia, There IS A Deep State & It’s Worse Than You Think

Yes Virginia, There IS A Deep State & It’s Worse Than You Think


Yes, Virginia, There IS a Deep State – and It Is Worse than You Think

By: William L. Anderson

Mention the term “deep state” in polite company and most likely no one will want to speak to you the rest of the evening. The deep state is what Wikipedia calls “discredited,” something reeking of conspiracies, false accusations, and the substitution of fantasy for the truth.

After the FBI raided Donald Trump’s home in Florida, Trump alluded to “deep state” actions, which brought predictable ridicule from the mainstream media. Trump was speaking conspiratorially, and if one follows the mainstream media these days, the only conspiracies are on the right. (You know, like the one in which the unarmed, ragtag January 6 rioters nearly overthrew the US government.)

After the recent revelations about how Twitter worked to hide the story of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop, Trump attributed the secrecy to a plot by the “deep state.” However, while the facts of the story really are outrageous, I don’t believe it was as much a secret conspiracy as a case of people being able to engage in certain actions with no political consequences.

Furthermore, journalist Matt Taibbi’s regarding FBI and CIA agents’ outright interference in the 2020 election via Twitter on the pretense that Russian operatives were spreading disinformation has further exposed both the involvement of federal law enforcement agents in partisan activities and the sad fact that those agents need not worry about being held accountable—especially if they are engaged in a “progressive” cause.

The Standard Deep State Narrative

One does not have to believe in a single conspiracy (not even about the 9/11 attacks) to understand that there really is what we can call a deep state. Indeed, what we might call the real deep state has nothing to do with conspiracies, secret meetings, and the like. Instead, this deep state operates in the open and in broad daylight, and that makes the deep state narrative an even greater threat than the secret cabal narrative.

When I was a young adult, I read a novel by two anticommunist journalists called The Spike, in which a young, liberal, and crusading journalist uncovers a nest of Soviet agents embedded in the US government. The journalist’s story on the affair, however, is spiked by his employer (a Washington Post–like paper), but the protagonist manages to get the story out elsewhere. The result is that a compromised president is brought down and the federal government is able to ferret out the Soviet agents.

Thus, in a dramatic moment, a motivated journalist and political allies expose the equivalent of the “deep state” and the US government makes a rightward turn. The deep state goes away.

The Hard Truth

Unfortunately, no novelist can write out our present deep state because that would be a bridge too far. The reason is that our present deep state simply is the executive branch of government, which has been written into our laws and our courts, and this branch has taken over much of the role originally assigned to the judicial wing of government, that of interpreting the laws.

The real power of the modern state is in its civil service, which is composed of employees of all the federal departments and agencies—employees who hardly are neutral ideologically and politically, employees who are protected by civil service laws and by unions. When progressive regimes such as the Biden and Obama administrations occupy the West Wing and Congress, the federal courts become almost irrelevant. The president and his political appointees govern by executive orders, which, not surprisingly, the allegedly neutral government employees enthusiastically support.

Much of modern lawmaking is by executive order, with many orders not even having to square with the statutes underlying them, something that has gone on for a long time. For example, when President Franklin Roosevelt seized private gold holdings in 1933, he based his executive order upon the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act. When President Biden announced student loan forgiveness, he based his order on the 9/11 Heroes Act, stretching that law and its obvious intent to the point that it was unrecognizable.

While not all executive orders have the effect of Executive Order 6102, they nonetheless involve the executive branch of the US government assuming powers that well may violate the Constitution yet are carried out without a worry that any outside agency—including the US Supreme Court—will intervene. (Yes, the courts so far have slapped down Biden’s student loan forgiveness scheme, but the litigation process is not complete, and the courts can be unpredictable.)

All-Powerful Bureaucracy Has Progressive Support

One would think that educated Americans would blanch at the prospect of federal agencies making policies independent of congressional or court oversight, but the opposite is true, especially when federal agents pursue progressive policies. For example, when the Supreme Court placed some legal fences around the Environmental Protection Agency’s powers to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, the progressive establishment exploded in anger.

For example, the New York Times, which carries the progressive standard, declared that the court had placed American lives in danger:

Regulatory agencies staffed by experts are the best available mechanism for a representative democracy to make decisions in areas of technical complexity. The E.P.A. is the entity that Congress relies upon to figure out how clean the air should be, and how to get there. Asserting that it lacks the power to perform its basic responsibilities is simply sabotage.

Governance by “experts” has been the progressive mantra for more than a century, the idea being that so-called experts embedded deep in government should be free to make whatever decisions they believe best to govern the rest of us. The assumption of the editors of the NYT is that the “experts” always (or at least usually) know what is best for everyone else and how to achieve those important social and economic ends.

Likewise, the revelations that the FBI and CIA were coercing social media companies to censor anything that contradicted certain progressive narratives coming from Washington, DC, should have been banner headlines everywhere and the lead story on the evening news. Instead, mainstream progressive journalists attacked Matt Taibbi, or like David French, they downplayed the seriousness of what happened and made excuses for federal agents.

(French argued that the only real question was whether federal agents had “violated the First Amendment” and that anything else was not fit for discussion. And, yes, he concluded that those agents probably had not violated the Constitution, missing the more important point that federal agents were trying to influence the outcome of an election.)

Conclusion

We are not speaking of secret conspiracies in which nefarious actions are carried out in the darkness. These things are carried out in daylight, complete with the names of the characters involved, yet people who raise serious questions about the legality of these actions, let alone the question of right and wrong, are praised and encouraged by our institutional gatekeepers.

That is why I say that this version of the deep state is much worse than whatever the authors of The Spike might have believed to exist. The people involved do what they darn well please, all the while claiming they are the soul of democracy, and many Americans seem to either believe them or no longer care.

••••

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)