WATCH: Kari Lake Outwits Reporter Who Probes Her Mainstream Abortion Views But Not Opponent’s Extremism

WATCH: Kari Lake Outwits Reporter Who Probes Her Mainstream Abortion Views But Not Opponent’s Extremism

Corporate media want voters to believe it’s Republicans who must defend their pro-life stance, but as Arizona’s GOP gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake pointed out in a recent exchange with a reporter, it is Democrats who should have to explain their support for abortion through all nine months of pregnancy.

“Abortion is effectively banned in the state right now. Tell me, is that something that you support?” the reporter for Arizona’s Family asked Lake at a Republican National Committee campaign event.

“I support saving as many lives as possible,” Lake said. “And what I really want to know and I’ve been waiting, I tune into you guys all the time, I want to know where Katie Hobbs stands, but I never hear you guys ask for that.”

Katie Hobbs, Arizona’s secretary of state and Lake’s Democrat opponent, says abortion is “health care” and that women should have “access to safe, legal abortions, period.” Her language mirrors the rhetoric often invoked by other radical pro-abortion Democrats who advocate for the legalized killing of babies on demand.

Sometimes, as Lake noted, this includes leaving babies who are born alive during a failed abortion to die without care. Despite that, the media haven’t pushed Hobbs or any other Democrats on their extreme stance, which is wildly out of touch with the majority of American voters.

“I’m happy to get back to you on this when you find out where Katie Hobbs stands,” Lake told the reporter. “Because let me tell you where she stands. She supports abortion right up until birth and after birth. She supports if a baby survives a botched abortion, that that baby die on a metal tray. And none of you ever tried to get her to talk about her stance. So get back to me after you do.”

Arizona recently reinstated a 15-week abortion ban, something many Republican and even Democrat voters favor. Lake admitted she wasn’t sure where she stood on the law, which allows exemptions if a mother’s life is in danger, but said she is a staunch defender of life in the womb and plans to enact life-saving policies if she is elected.

“I’m pro-life,” Lake said. “My plan would be that every woman who walks into an abortion clinic knows that there are options out there. They don’t have to choose that. There are families who would love to adopt a baby. And right now, the way it’s been going, they go in and they only have one option. That’s it. Nobody tells them that there are other options. We want to help our women. If they’re afraid, we want to help them. We want to give women health care, and I want to help people.”

“I want to debate this topic on Oct. 12,” Lake added. “But [Hobbs] really needs to show up for that debate.”

With the help of the media, Hobbs isn’t just getting away with refusing to debate Lake. She’s also getting away with championing the demise of vulnerable human lives without scrutiny.


Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.

Source

Flint, Mich. Clerk Resigns After Elections Group Calls Out Lopsided Number Of Democrat Poll Watchers

Flint, Mich. Clerk Resigns After Elections Group Calls Out Lopsided Number Of Democrat Poll Watchers

Flint, Michigan’s longtime city clerk is retiring after an election integrity group sent a letter to her office demanding she balance out the number of Democrat and Republican election inspectors. 

On Sept. 6, Pure Integrity Michigan Elections (PIME) and attorney Erick Kaardal of the Thomas More Society sent a demand letter to Flint and City Clerk Inez Brown threatening legal action if they do not balance out the number of partisan poll watchers before the November general election. As previously reported, during Flint’s Aug. 2 primary, the city hired 422 Democrats compared to just 27 Republican election inspectors — in direct violation of a Michigan state statute that requires equal representation of party election inspectors. 

On Sept. 8, Brown, after serving as Flint’s city clerk for 25 years, abruptly announced her resignation effective Sept. 30 — roughly one month before the November election. Brown gave no reason for her resignation and caught city officials by surprise.

“My administrative office was taken by surprise,” Flint Mayor Sheldon Neeley told the Flint Beat. “I had no foreknowledge of this occurring this soon.” Because of Brown’s resignation, Neeley reached out to Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s office for help running the city’s elections. Benson is up for re-election this year, raising questions about the ethics of her involvement in Flint’s elections.

“Can her office be considered impartial in running the elections in Flint?” Patrice Johnson, chair of PIME told The Federalist. “The law states that if you are running for office, you cannot be an election inspector in the precinct in which you’re running.” 

Despite such questions, Johnson sees Brown’s resignation as a step in the right direction. Brown’s tenure as Flint city clerk has led to multiple controversies, including giving mayoral candidates the wrong filing deadline in 2015 and alleged failure to process absentee ballots

“The pressure we’ve put on the city led to this,” Johnson said. “This is a HUGE win.” 

Regardless of Brown’s resignation, Johnson expects Flint to fully comply with PIME’s demand letter and balance its number of partisan election inspectors in time for the November election.

“In a state with more than 7 million registered voters, and where an election inspector need not live in the precinct in which they work, there is no excuse for an unhealthy imbalance of workers at our township and municipal elections,” she said.


Victoria Marshall is a staff writer at The Federalist. Her writing has been featured in the New York Post, National Review, and Townhall. She graduated from Hillsdale College in May 2021 with a major in politics and a minor in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @vemrshll.

Source

Flint, Mich. Clerk Resigns After Elections Group Calls Out Lopsided Number Of Democrat Poll Watchers

Flint, Mich. Clerk Resigns After Elections Group Calls Out Lopsided Number Of Democrat Poll Watchers

Flint, Michigan’s longtime city clerk is retiring after an election integrity group sent a letter to her office demanding she balance out the number of Democrat and Republican election inspectors. 

On Sept. 6, Pure Integrity Michigan Elections (PIME) and attorney Erick Kaardal of the Thomas More Society sent a demand letter to Flint and City Clerk Inez Brown threatening legal action if they do not balance out the number of partisan poll watchers before the November general election. As previously reported, during Flint’s Aug. 2 primary, the city hired 422 Democrats compared to just 27 Republican election inspectors — in direct violation of a Michigan state statute that requires equal representation of party election inspectors. 

On Sept. 8, Brown, after serving as Flint’s city clerk for 25 years, abruptly announced her resignation effective Sept. 30 — roughly one month before the November election. Brown gave no reason for her resignation and caught city officials by surprise.

“My administrative office was taken by surprise,” Flint Mayor Sheldon Neeley told the Flint Beat. “I had no foreknowledge of this occurring this soon.” Because of Brown’s resignation, Neeley reached out to Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s office for help running the city’s elections. Benson is up for re-election this year, raising questions about the ethics of her involvement in Flint’s elections.

“Can her office be considered impartial in running the elections in Flint?” Patrice Johnson, chair of PIME told The Federalist. “The law states that if you are running for office, you cannot be an election inspector in the precinct in which you’re running.” 

Despite such questions, Johnson sees Brown’s resignation as a step in the right direction. Brown’s tenure as Flint city clerk has led to multiple controversies, including giving mayoral candidates the wrong filing deadline in 2015 and alleged failure to process absentee ballots

“The pressure we’ve put on the city led to this,” Johnson said. “This is a HUGE win.” 

Regardless of Brown’s resignation, Johnson expects Flint to fully comply with PIME’s demand letter and balance its number of partisan election inspectors in time for the November election.

“In a state with more than 7 million registered voters, and where an election inspector need not live in the precinct in which they work, there is no excuse for an unhealthy imbalance of workers at our township and municipal elections,” she said.


Victoria Marshall is a staff writer at The Federalist. Her writing has been featured in the New York Post, National Review, and Townhall. She graduated from Hillsdale College in May 2021 with a major in politics and a minor in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @vemrshll.

Source

Grocery Shop With Me To Fact-Check Biden’s Inflation Up ‘Hardly At All’ Claim

Grocery Shop With Me To Fact-Check Biden’s Inflation Up ‘Hardly At All’ Claim

By now you’ve no doubt heard about President Joe Biden’s interview with “60 Minutes” in which he declared the pandemic “over” and said unequivocally that, “yes,” the United States will come to Taiwan’s defense whenever China attacks. He also made some dubious claims about inflation.

When CBS interviewer Scott Pelley highlighted the abysmal state of the economy and noted that “people are shocked by their grocery bills,” Biden sputtered that the “inflation rate month to month was up just an inch, hardly at all.” To give you a flavor of the rest of the exchange:

Biden: [You guys] make it sound like, all of a sudden, ‘My God, it went to 8.2 percent.’

Pelley: It’s the highest inflation rate, Mr. President, in 40 years.

Biden: I got that. But guess what we are. We’re in a position where for the last several months, it hasn’t spiked. It has just barely — it’s been basically even.

It’s worth clarifying what Biden is trying to claim here. The inflation rate clocked in at 8.3 percent in August, after registering at 8.5 percent in July and 9.1 percent in June. When the president says inflation “hasn’t spiked” and has “been basically even,” he’s talking about these fractional changes — and he’s hoping you don’t know what they mean and that his lapdogs in the corporate media won’t explain them to you.

But when we’re talking about inflation and how it affects prices, the baseline isn’t some-odd 8 percent or whatever the rate happened to be last month. In other words, we don’t measure August’s inflation as down 0.2 percentage points from July and 0.8 points from June. These monthly figures represent year-over-year changes, meaning each report describes how prices that month compare to prices at the same time last year — and they’re all up, by a lot.

To that end, I suppose it’s accurate to say that month-to-month, inflation “hasn’t spiked” — but that just means inflation has been consistently bad under this administration. But the goal obviously isn’t to keep inflation “basically even” at a 40-year high; it’s to bring it the heck down.

But even these overall 8 and 9 percent figures are misleading — and dramatically under the money — for essential needs such as energy and food. As Pelley said, Americans are “shocked” every time they go to the grocery store.

But just how bad is it? Do grocery increases really amount to just 8 percent, or a few cents, per item? Are prices up, as Biden claimed, “hardly at all”?

I went to the grocery store and ran some numbers, and I too was shocked by what I found.

Midterm to Midterm

I stopped by one of the nearest grocery chains, which isn’t as cheap as Aldi but is no Harris Teeter highway robbery either. I’d say it’s comparable to a nice Pick ‘N Save, with a few brand options for each item.

While doing some personal shopping, I took inventory of basic items (universal brands if the store had them), some of which were “on sale.” I documented each item’s regular price. Then, using data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), I cross-referenced those prices with grocery costs during a comparable time in recent memory: the last midterms in 2018 under President Donald Trump — a year and a half into the presidency and during a time of strong political incentives to keep Americans happy.

I avoided produce, most of which the BLS doesn’t keep consistent records for and which has such a short shelf-life that prices vary widely. I did, however, check in on other essentials across a variety of categories: baking items such as flour and sugar, meat, eggs, cheese, and other staples such as bread and pasta. And let’s just say after running the numbers, an 8 percent increase would have been welcomed. The real hikes were insane.

Milk, Eggs, and Bacon

Let’s start with breakfast, as you do. In September 2018, bacon cost $5.50 per pound, according to BLS averages. Today, those delicious piggy strips will run you about $7.99 per pound for your run-of-the-mill brand.

That’s a 45 percent price jump, almost all of which occurred after Biden took office.

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Milk is even worse. In 2018, one gallon of whole milk cost $2.98. Now, the grocery store’s off-brand milk costs $4.89, a price increase of almost 70 percent.

Milk is an input into multiple other foods, such as cheese, sour cream, cream for your morning coffee, and more. So when milk goes up, it has a big effect on the prices of many other edibles.

Bureau of Labor Statistics

The other two non-specialty brands available, both Midwest-specific, cost $4.99 per gallon and a whopping $5.39. The latter was the last one on the shelf, an all-too-familiar sight in Biden’s America.

Eggs are some of the worst offenders of all. Americans paid $1.65 for a dozen of Grade A, large eggs in 2018. Now, those eggs cost $3.49 for 12.

I’ll spare you the math. That’s a nearly 112 percent spike that’s coincided with the current president’s time in office. The cost has more than doubled.

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Pasta, Bread, and Baking

Bread and pasta used to be reliably inexpensive staples of the American diet. It’s why go-to meals for lower-income families often include PB&Js for lunch and spaghetti for dinner. But they’re not so inexpensive anymore.

Wheat bread in 2018 cost $1.95 per pound. Now it costs $3.19, a 64 percent rise.

The cost of white bread has skyrocketed. Four years ago, it ran consumers just $1.29 per pound. Today it’s $2.79. That’s a 116 percent spike.

And while the price of spaghetti in September 2018 was $1.20 per pound, America’s go-to pasta now costs $1.84, meaning it’s risen in price by more than half.

Speaking of rising by half, that’s also what’s happened to the price of sugar. Four years ago, it cost just 58 cents per pound. Now it costs 87.

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Flour is even worse, with a 70 percent increase. In 2018 it cost an average of 47 cents per pound, and today it costs 80.

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Meat and Cheese

A consistent complaint among Americans is the cost of meat, and it’s easy to see why. Prices are up considerably for some of consumers’ most reliable protein sources.

Chicken breasts cost an average of $2.90 per pound during the Trump midterm era. During Biden’s midterm season, they are running at $4.99 per pound. That’s a 72 percent increase for what was arguably one of the most basic, versatile, and affordable of poultry proteins. The upward trend started about the same time the Biden administration took the reins of the U.S. economy.

Ground beef, another staple, is up from $3.74 per pound in 2018 to a staggering $6.29 per pound now. No, that’s not for organic. It’s a good thing the summer season is coming to a close, because those cookouts were getting painfully expensive — 68 percent more expensive for the burgers than just a few years ago.

The cheese for the top of those burgers went up a bit too. While cheddar cheese ran about $5.13 per pound in 2018, it’s up to about $6.00 now, for a nearly 17 percent rise.

Cravings

Junk food isn’t exempt from Biden’s inflation, either, so if you’ve got a salty craving, expect to pay more to satisfy it — at least twice as much, actually.

In September 2018, potato chips were $4.43 for 16 ounces. Now they cost more than that for a regular price 8-ounce bag.

That means today potato chips are $9.18 for 16 ounces at my grocery store, a 107 percent jump for the simple pleasure.

Bureau of Labor Statistics

So … ‘Hardly at All’?

This is a lot of figures to make sense of, but it’s safe to say a single-digit inflation rate doesn’t capture it, and you definitely wouldn’t describe the prices as up “barely an inch.” In fact, among these basic items in my shopping survey, prices were up an overall average of 70 percent since just the Trump midterms!

Of course, it should go without saying that groceries in some parts of the country will be cheaper than in the Midwest city where I live, while others will be more expensive. And of course, consumers can sometimes find more affordable off-brands than some of the above, just as they could find brands that are much spendier. But these 2018 BLS statistics are “U.S. city average[s],” meaning it’s fair and accurate to compare them to mid-tier brands in this American city in 2022 — and the comparison is damning.

The left-wing media and Biden apologists will retort that prices are the fault of a virus or Vladimir Putin or malicious corporations, but the administration’s reckless fiscal policies speak for themselves. And it isn’t as though other presidents don’t have to contend with geopolitical forces or crises outside their control. When Trump was in office, everything from an airborne virus to Twitter spats was his fault. Now that Biden is commander in chief, it’s only right that the direct consequences of his policy failures be laid at his feet.

So consider this a fact-check. Biden’s claim that inflation is up “hardly at all” deserves pants-on-fire status and all the Pinocchios. But Americans don’t require a fact-check. They just got home from the grocery store, and they’re shocked at what they see.


Source

Maine’s Education Department Calls ‘MAGA,’ ‘Colorblindness,’ And ‘Columbus Day’ Forms Of Covert Racism

Maine’s Education Department Calls ‘MAGA,’ ‘Colorblindness,’ And ‘Columbus Day’ Forms Of Covert Racism

The Education Department of Maine’s Democrat Gov. Janet Mills is referring to the slogan “Make America Great Again” (MAGA), as a form of covert racism, according to a new report.

In an instructional webinar video for students and teachers discovered by Breitbart News, a slideshow presentation titled “Racism is a Virus” lists out several terms, phrases, and actions that individuals should associate with racism and white supremacy. In addition to “MAGA,” the phrase made famous by former President Donald Trump and his supporters, the slideshow lists “Calling the police on black people,” “All Lives Matter,” “anti-immigration policies,” “paternalism,” “meritocracy myth,” “colorblindness,” and “Columbus Day” as a few of the examples of racism.

“The video comes as part of a slideshow, or ‘module,’ recommended by the state Education Department’s Maine Online Opportunities for Sustained Education (MOOSE) for high school-aged students,” the Breitbart report reads. “Slide 15 of the module offers resources for students, which include only a few links, two of them being to Black Lives Matter’s and GLAAD’s websites.”

The report later goes on to reveal a separate MOOSE module geared towards high schoolers that includes an instructional video called “Root Cause,” which “teaches about ‘power, privilege, and oppression.’”

“You could be talking about how white people have power over people of color, and it’s important to know that this is a system set up intentionally to deny people equal access to opportunities,” instructor and Portland Public Schools employee Andrea Levinsky says in the “Root Cause” video. “I also wanted to add that you don’t need all of the privileged identities to have privilege. So, for example, I’m white, so I have white privilege, but I’m also a woman, so I don’t experience privilege with being a woman.”

As noted by Breitbart, MOOSE “offers numerous modules as part of [Mills’] taxpayer-funded education plan introduced in September 2021,” with the Democrat governor saying that it was created to address “the academic impact of lost instructional time” after she “recommended shutting down in-person learning in schools for months in 2020 as a response to coronavirus case surges.”

The branding of “MAGA” as racist by Mills’ Education Department isn’t a new concept, but rather falls in lockstep with the same language used by President Joe Biden to paint his political opposition as domestic enemies to the United States. During a Sept. 1 tirade that can only be described as demonic, the president repeatedly accused Donald Trump and “MAGA Republicans” of undermining democracy and the very fabric of the country.

“Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic,” Biden said. “There’s no question that the Republican Party today is dominated, driven, and intimidated by Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans. And that is a threat to this country.”

Mills is currently engaged in a tight reelection battle against former Maine governor and GOP gubernatorial candidate Paul LePage, who recently launched his own “Parents Bill of Rights” to ensure parents’ involvement in their children’s education. While unreliable polling used by the left-leaning corporate media to manipulate public opinion has shown Mills consistently leading her Republican opponent, the race is still very competitive heading into November.


Shawn Fleetwood is a Staff Writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He also serves as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Source

Leftist Groups Are Reportedly Bribing Influencers To Peddle Misinformation For 2022 Midterms

Leftist Groups Are Reportedly Bribing Influencers To Peddle Misinformation For 2022 Midterms

A left-wing nonprofit focused on “fighting disinformation” allegedly offered a TikTok influencer $400 to spread lies about Republican involvement in the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riot.

Preston Moore, a lawyer with a large following on TikTok, told his followers in a video on his account that he was approached by the Good Information Foundation to make an “anti-Donald Trump propaganda post related to the January 6 investigation that is completely not true.”

After Preston said he was interested in collaborating, the foundation reportedly told him what to include in his post, including “images and scenes from the January 6th insurrection” and talking points like “the violence on January 6 was actually planned and paid for by Trump Republicans.” Specifically, the foundation told Preston he could say that the “Trump campaign paid literally millions of dollars to make January 6 happen” and that many Trump officials and Republican members of Congress were involved.

Other examples of “key messaging” Preston says the foundation highlighted for him to include was that “there is an ongoing threat of political violence or MAGA Republicans trying to overturn elections,” and that he should try to channel the anger of his followers to make them, as he summarized, “more likely to vote in the midterms.” 

When Moore responded to the email by asking, “What is the basis for the claim that the Trump campaign itself paid millions of dollars to make the January 6 siege of the Capitol happen?” he says the foundation refused to answer his question.

“We know of only one person who blew the whistle, but God only knows how many people are taking them up on this,” Scott Walter, president of Capital Research Center, told The Federalist. “Just how many TikTokers are they doing this with? How many Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook accounts are they targeting? How much money have they allocated? Because $400 is total chump change for these guys.”

The Good Information Foundation is a nonprofit organization founded in 2021 “to tackle the growing information crisis in America that is undermining social trust, harming public health, and damaging our democracy” according to its website. It aims to combat misinformation online by increasing “the flow of good, factual information” by “creating, incubating, funding and lifting up fact-based solutions, voices, programs and initiatives.” The foundation is a part of Good Information Inc., a corporation backed by LinkedIn founder and far-left activist Reid Hoffman and billionaire leftist George Soros. 

Good Information Inc.’s CEO is Tara McGowan, a Democratic operative who also founded ACRONYM, a leftist political advocacy group that focuses on voter mobilization and digital advertising. Starting in 2019, McGowan oversaw an ACRONYM project called Courier Newsroom, a media initiative that manages left-wing websites presenting themselves as local news outlets while spreading “hyperlocal partisan propaganda.” In an interview with VICE, McGowan admitted that “it’s more effective to create ‘news content’ than to simply run ads for Democratic causes.” 

During the 2020 election cycle, ACRONYM ran a network of leftist propagandizing sites fronting as news outlets in the swing states of Wisconsin, Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida. In a memo McGowan wrote for ACRONYM before the election, she stated that each outlet “will pair original reporting and aggregated content with our ad placement and political targeting expertise to distribute these stories to strategic segments of voters before, during and between election cycles.”

Even left-leaning OpenSecrets sounded the alarm on the project, describing ACRONYM as a “liberal dark money group” and explaining “websites affiliated with Courier Newsroom that appear to be free-standing local news outlets are actually part of a coordinated effort with deep ties to Democractic political operatives.” 

Simply put: the Good Information Foundation is run by Democratic operatives with a history of peddling Democratic Party propaganda and presenting it as news. Its latest campaign appears to be paying social media influencers to distribute disinformation and present it to their followers as factual, so as to gain an upper hand in the upcoming 2022 midterms.

TikTok, one of the most popular social media networks in America, will be a key battleground for such efforts. But according to its website, “TikTok does not allow paid political ads, and that includes content influencers are paid to create.” In the months leading up to the midterms, TikTok has said it will be notifying influencers and advertising agencies of these changes “so the rules of the road are abundantly clear when it comes to paid content around elections,” adding that any paid political content that is not properly disclosed would be “promptly removed from the platform.” 

Neither TikTok nor the Good Information Foundation responded to The Federalist’s requests for comment. 


Victoria Marshall is a staff writer at The Federalist. Her writing has been featured in the New York Post, National Review, and Townhall. She graduated from Hillsdale College in May 2021 with a major in politics and a minor in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @vemrshll.

Source

Here’s How Big Tech Plans To Rig The 2022 Midterms

Here’s How Big Tech Plans To Rig The 2022 Midterms

As the 2022 midterms loom, big tech companies are again announcing their plans to meddle in U.S. elections by censoring news and information. Social media censorship ramped up dramatically following President Donald Trump’s 2016 victory, leading to companies such as Twitter and Facebook colluding with Democrat operatives in intelligence agencies to censor and suppress factual stories that harmed then-candidate Joe Biden during his 2020 campaign.

Two years later, following heavy documentation of the meddling, big tech companies are intent on using the same strategy. And they’re openly admitting as much

Facebook 

Nick Clegg, president of global affairs for Meta — Facebook’s parent company — wrote in a blog post that Facebook’s approach to the 2022 midterms will be “largely consistent with the policies and safeguards” from 2020. 

Posts rated as false or partly false by one of Facebook’s 11 so-called “fact-checkers” will receive a label titled “false information,” causing their outreach to be dramatically limited. During the 2020 election, NeverTrump outlet The Dispatch — one of the fact-checkers — published an inaccurate “fact-check” that shut down public communications from pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List just weeks before the election.

Lead Stories, one of Facebook’s many left-wing “fact check” censors, is partly funded by the Democratic National Committee as well as Beijing-based ByteDance, the Chinese company that owns TikTok. In 2020, Lead Stories was responsible for censoring The Federalist’s own correct reporting about the Georgia election. After The Federalist criticized Lead Stories for its fake “fact-checking,” it was censored again.

While accurate stories about Hunter Biden’s laptop were never fact-checked, their reach was also limited in 2020, as Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg admitted in an interview with podcaster Joe Rogan. According to Zuckerberg, the FBI pressured Facebook to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story by falsely claiming it was Russian disinformation.

Such collusion between the intelligence community and Facebook is sure to continue: in its 2022 Factsheet outlining its approach to the U.S. midterms, the company writes that it will be “working with federal government partners including the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, as well as local and state election officials and industry peers, to make sure we’re all preparing for different scenarios.”

While discussing their approach to the midterms with The New York Times, Facebook employees said the company will take a “greater interest” in censoring information that it claims could lead to “real-world violence” like the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

According to internal documents obtained by The Wall Street Journal, Facebook’s Disaggregating Harmful Networks Taskforce tracks hundreds of thousands of users and pages that could “distribute potentially harmful content.” Once Facebook employees identify a “dangerous information corridor” — networks of accounts, pages, and groups — they work to undermine it, usually by removing popular accounts or severely restricting users’ ability to transmit information. This is the same strategy Facebook applied when it censored more than 700,000 “Stop the Steal” supporters after the Jan 6. riot.

Yet Facebook took no action against the Democrat-funded and coordinated operation to question the legitimacy of the 2016 election by falsely accusing Donald Trump of being a traitor who stole the election by colluding with Russia. That lie, which led to mass public hysteria and years of investigations, is allowed free rein on its platform. Facebook’s so-called “fact-checkers” included journalists who participated in spreading the lie or otherwise allowed it to continue without censorship via fact-checking.

Despite this open political double standard, an internal memo from the task force claimed “an individual can question election results. But when it’s amplified by a movement, it can damage democracy. There is harm in the way movements shift norms and an understanding of collective truth.”

Twitter 

In August, Twitter announced it would begin enforcing its “Civic Integrity Policy” for the 2022 midterms. This means taking “action against misleading claims about the voting process, misleading content intended to intimidate or dissuade people from participating in the election, or misleading claims that may undermine public confidence in elections outcomes.” 

Like Facebook, Twitter will label what it claims is “false or misleading” information as misinformation. Once labeled, such content will not be distributed by the company’s algorithms. Twitter may also remove “false or misleading” tweets entirely.

“In cases where there is potential for harm associated with the false or misleading claim, the Tweet may not be liked or shared to prevent the spread of the misleading information,” a company blog post reads. Such a policy is unlikely to apply to disinformation from the left. For example, during the 2020 election, Twitter refused to censor viral tweets pushing misinformation about USPS mailboxes that negatively affected the right.

Ironically — as Federalist Senior Editor John Daniel Davidson notes – Twitter was probably the single greatest source of disinformation during the 2020 election. Just weeks before the election, the social media company worked overtime to censor The New York Post’s story on First Son Hunter Biden’s laptop, even locking the Post’s account and those of other users’ who tried to distribute it.

As such, Twitter “brazenly hid a story from its users that, had they seen it, would have been quite damaging to Biden and certainly would have caused some people to change their votes,” Davidson wrote. Davidson was later deplatformed by Twitter for saying scientifically accurate truths about biological distinctions between men and women. Twitter routinely bans effective communicators who question left-wing narratives pushed by its company and other activists.

Of course, no censorship comes close to the level of Twitter (and Facebook) banning then-President Trump, leader of the Republican Party, from their platforms after the Jan. 6 riot — effectively cutting off communication from the president of the United States to his supporters and the rest of the country.

TikTok

Arguably the most popular social network in America right now, TikTok announced that it would also be countering so-called election misinformation through its Elections Center, a segment of the app that will “connect people who engage with election content to authoritative information and sources in more than 45 languages.”

As Federalist Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky reported, this gives the Chinese-owned social media company access to the voting profiles of all American users who opt to use TikTok’s Elections Center. As TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, is connected to the Chinese Communist Party, TikTok’s Elections Center “will put detailed voter profiles in the hands of a company based in Beijing, stocked with party members and state employees, subject to laws that allow the Chinese government data access.” 

As Jashinsky notes, China could influence the midterm elections using this data, as well as censoring American public discourse in favor of the Chinese Communist Party’s geopolitical ambitions by either fomenting public discord or undermining anti-CCP politicians under the guise of “combatting misinformation.” 

YouTube

YouTube was the last major social media platform to announce that it, too, had a plan to combat misinformation leading up to November’s general election. 

In a Sept. 1 blog post, the company wrote that searches for midterm-related videos will prioritize “content coming from authoritative national and local news sources like PBS NewsHour, The Wall Street Journal, Univision and local ABC, CBS and NBC affiliates,” although many of these corporate media outlets possess a heavy left-wing bias. Any content deemed “borderline” misinformation will be prevented from being widely distributed.

YouTube also claimed it will remove “election content that violates our policies,” including “misleading voters on how to vote, encouraging interference in the democratic process, inciting violence, or advancing certain types of election misinformation,” which includes “election integrity” content.

While this policy will be enforced regardless of “political viewpoint,” the company emphasized that videos “claiming widespread fraud, errors, or glitches occurred in the 2020 U.S. presidential election, or alleging the election was stolen or rigged” would violate its policies. YouTube allows members of the Democrat Party to continue using its platform to claim elections it loses are rigged or stolen.

Snapchat

Democratic organizations were accidentally granted access to a trove of Republican voter data on Snapchat, enabling them to hone their political ads leading up to the 2022 midterms. As Federalist Staff Writer Shawn Fleetwood reports, a “slip-up” by Snapchat gave groups such as the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, and Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams’ gubernatorial campaign access to voter data by Republican-aligned firm i360. Such groups used the data to create targeted political ads to sway voters.

While Snapchat claims it is working to rectify such supposedly accidental data sharing, “the blunder underscores the sensitivities surrounding reams of voter data that have become a highly valuable political commodity,” Axios writes.

While the data breach affected both Republican and Democrat data firms, the data’s “use by political groups was significantly more prolific on the Democratic side.”

What This Means

Much like in 2020, Big Tech companies are actively censoring information they deem harmful to their official narrative or preferred candidates. By falsely labeling factual information from conservatives “misinformation,” such companies have the power to control the flow of information that informs voters and rig elections in their favor.

It’s been heavily reported that companies like Facebook and Twitter have colluded with the Biden administration to censor information related to Covid-19. As the Biden administration already has plans to massively influence the 2022 midterms, they and other Democrats will continue to collude with big tech to swing high-stakes congressional races come November.


Victoria Marshall is a staff writer at The Federalist. Her writing has been featured in the New York Post, National Review, and Townhall. She graduated from Hillsdale College in May 2021 with a major in politics and a minor in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @vemrshll.

The Federalist logo eagle mark

Unlock commenting by joining the Federalist Community.

Subscribe

Source

Snap’s GOP Voter Data Abuse Is Just Another Example Of Big Tech’s Election Interference On Behalf Of Democrats

Snap’s GOP Voter Data Abuse Is Just Another Example Of Big Tech’s Election Interference On Behalf Of Democrats

A so-called “blunder” by social media platform Snap Inc. enabled Democrat-run organizations to gain access to a trove of Republican voter data to “hone” their political ads for the upcoming 2022 midterm elections, according to a new report. Formally known as Snapchat Inc., the company rebranded in 2016 to include its other products, such as its “Spectacles” glasses.

As Axios reported on Wednesday, the “slip-up” by the Big Tech company permitted groups such as “the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund and Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams’ gubernatorial campaign” to “target their ads on the platform using data maintained by the Republican-aligned firm i360.”

“There’s no indication Snap was aware of or facilitated that data sharing, and the company said it’s taking steps to rectify the oversight,” the report claims. “But the blunder underscores the sensitivities surrounding reams of voter data that have become a highly valuable political commodity.”

While Axios notes that the issue “impacted data maintained by both Democratic and Republican data firms,” records reportedly reviewed by the outlet indicate that the data’s “use by political groups was significantly more prolific on the Democratic side.”

“We take full responsibility for this mistake, and as soon as we became aware of it, we notified the two Democratic and Republican vendors who were equally impacted, and took action to correct the issue,” a Snap representative told Axios. “We are also taking steps to ensure this doesn’t happen again.”

While a self-proclaimed “mistake,” Snap’s voter data mismanagement is hardly the first time a Big Tech company’s actions have benefited the Democrat Party in U.S. elections. Look no further than the 2020 presidential contest, wherein both Facebook and Twitter worked overtime to squash The New York Post’s report on the Hunter Biden laptop story in the days leading up to the election.

As The Federalist reported at the time, a Media Research Center survey revealed that the censoring of the bombshell story affected voters’ decisions at the ballot box, with 1 in 6 Biden voters surveyed saying “they would have been less likely to vote for Biden if they had been aware of evidence Biden lied about ‘knowledge of his son Hunter’s overseas business dealings.’”

What’s more troubling, however, is that the cozy relationship between Big Tech companies and the Democrat Party goes back even further than 2020. After successfully running the first real “online” campaign in the 2008 election, former President Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign made sure to enhance its ties with Big Tech firms heading into the fall election, with Facebook being the most notable.

As detailed in her bestselling book “Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections,” Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway notes how “[t]he Obama campaign opened a Silicon Valley field office to tap into all the tech expertise that was rushing to help his campaign” in the lead-up to the 2012 contest.

“Carol Davidsen, the analytics director for Obama’s campaign, would later admit that the campaign had access to all of Facebook’s data, saying, ‘[Facebook] allowed us to do things they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side,’” Hemingway wrote. “In 2012, the Obama campaign sucked up all the data on Facebook and was greeted with a chorus of hosannas celebrating tech-savvy electioneering. In 2016, when the Trump campaign did the exact same thing, the media started yelling that the sky was falling.”


Shawn Fleetwood is a Staff Writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He also serves as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

The Federalist logo eagle mark

Unlock commenting by joining the Federalist Community.

Subscribe

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)