Jan. 6 Committee Decides To Move Final Show Trial Hearing Even Closer To Election Day

Jan. 6 Committee Decides To Move Final Show Trial Hearing Even Closer To Election Day

The House Select Committee on Jan. 6 postponed Wednesday’s hearing to move the panel’s latest show trial closer to Election Day.

In a joint statement to The Washington Post, committee leadership blamed inclement weather brewing 1,000 miles away for the decision to postpone.

“In light of Hurricane Ian bearing down on parts of Florida, we have decided to postpone tomorrow’s proceedings,” said Chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., and Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., who vice-chairs the committee. “We’re praying for the safety of all those in the storm’s path.”

No new date has been announced yet, though the hearing will almost certainly take place just before the November midterms. In March, Democrats on the House probe acknowledged the committee’s work was all about smearing the opposition ahead of the fall elections, with hearings carefully choreographed to coincide with the contests.

“Their challenge: Making the public care deeply — and read hundreds of pages more — about an event that happened more than a year ago, and that many Americans feel they already understand,” The Washington Post reported.

They’ll attempt to do so this spring through public hearings, along with a potential interim report and a final report that will be published ahead of the November midterms — with the findings likely a key part of the Democrats midterm strategy. They hope their recommendations to prevent another insurrection will be adopted, but also that their work will repel voters from Republicans who they say helped propel the attack.

The committee held eight hearings throughout the summer complete with television producers hired to dramatize the proceedings, which are straight out of Soviet Moscow’s 1937 playbook.

From early June to the end of July, committee lawmakers routinely ignored the Capitol security failures on Jan. 6 to focus on criminalizing objections to electoral certification and smearing political opponents with disinformation. Fabricated timelines have also become a main staple of the televised hearings.

The summer hearings unearthed so little substance that in July Rep. Cheney, who lost her reelection bid in a primary last month, announced season two set for September. Season two, however, will now be moved closer to Election Day as Democrats weigh whether to demand former President Donald Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence testify before the committee.

“We have far more evidence to share with the American people and more to gather,” Cheney said.


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

Source

Jan. 6 Committee Decides To Move Final Show Trial Hearing Even Closer To Election Day

The House Select Committee on Jan. 6 postponed Wednesday’s hearing to move the panel’s latest show trial closer to Election Day.

In a joint statement to The Washington Post, committee leadership blamed inclement weather brewing 1,000 miles away for the decision to postpone.

“In light of Hurricane Ian bearing down on parts of Florida, we have decided to postpone tomorrow’s proceedings,” said Chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., and Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., who vice-chairs the committee. “We’re praying for the safety of all those in the storm’s path.”

No new date has been announced yet, though the hearing will almost certainly take place just before the November midterms. In March, Democrats on the House probe acknowledged the committee’s work was all about smearing the opposition ahead of the fall elections, with hearings carefully choreographed to coincide with the contests.

“Their challenge: Making the public care deeply — and read hundreds of pages more — about an event that happened more than a year ago, and that many Americans feel they already understand,” The Washington Post reported.

They’ll attempt to do so this spring through public hearings, along with a potential interim report and a final report that will be published ahead of the November midterms — with the findings likely a key part of the Democrats midterm strategy. They hope their recommendations to prevent another insurrection will be adopted, but also that their work will repel voters from Republicans who they say helped propel the attack.

The committee held eight hearings throughout the summer complete with television producers hired to dramatize the proceedings, which are straight out of Soviet Moscow’s 1937 playbook.

From early June to the end of July, committee lawmakers routinely ignored the Capitol security failures on Jan. 6 to focus on criminalizing objections to electoral certification and smearing political opponents with disinformation. Fabricated timelines have also become a main staple of the televised hearings.

The summer hearings unearthed so little substance that in July Rep. Cheney, who lost her reelection bid in a primary last month, announced season two set for September. Season two, however, will now be moved closer to Election Day as Democrats weigh whether to demand former President Donald Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence testify before the committee.

“We have far more evidence to share with the American people and more to gather,” Cheney said.


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

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

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

Heritage Action Steps Up In Arizona Senate Race After McConnell Pulls $8 Million From Masters

Heritage Action Steps Up In Arizona Senate Race After McConnell Pulls $8 Million From Masters

An independent super PAC aligned with Heritage Action for America, the political arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, is pumping money into the Arizona Senate race amid near-total abandonment by Republican leadership in this highly competitive race amid a currently 50-50 Senate..

On Monday, the Sentinel Action Fund announced $5 million to support Republican Senate candidate Blake Masters in the form of voter outreach efforts and television ad buys after Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s Senate Leadership Fund (SLF) pulled $8 million from the contest.

“We wanted to be there from a conservative standpoint,” said Jessica Anderson, the president of the Sentinel Action Fund, highlighting the group’s spending in Arizona, and Masters in particular, as a “clarion call for the conservative movement to come and support this candidate.”

While the group has also announced efforts to get involved with pivotal Senate races in Nevada and Georgia, Anderson emphasized “$5 million is so far our largest single expenditure that we have planned.”

In the final week of August, McConnell’s super PAC canceled nearly $8 million in ad buys for Arizona and demanded private entrepreneur and megadonor Peter Thiel step in to replace the lost funding. The money initially set aside for Masters will instead go to support J.D. Vance in Ohio.

Both Masters and Vance, who worked for Thiel prior to jumping into crowded Senate primaries, were backed by the billionaire venture capitalist with $15 million each during the party contests. McConnell is now demanding more money from Thiel, who has yet to spend on either in the general, to push the candidates across the November finish line.

The McConnell super PAC is driving more money from the Arizona Senate race, where Masters is down by 4 points in the RealClearPolitics aggregate of polls, to Ohio, where polls show Vance up by more than 2. In August, polling from the most reliable pollster of recent election cycles, the Trafalgar Group, showed Masters down by 4 points with Vance up by 5.

“McConnell told Thiel over the phone last week that Vance’s race in Ohio was proving more costly for the Senate Leadership Fund than anticipated,” the Washington Post reported on Aug. 31. McConnell added “that money was not unlimited and that there was a need for the billionaire to ‘come in, in a big way, in Arizona,’” an anonymous “person familiar with the conversation” reportedly told the Post.

Campaign finance data and recent electoral trends in each state, however, cast doubt on McConnell’s claims that Vance was in more desperate need of funds than Masters.

Former President Donald Trump carried Ohio comfortably by 8 points in both 2016 and 2020. Trump captured Arizona’s 11 electoral votes in 2016 by less than 4 points, and lost the state in 2020. Arizona’s two Senate seats also became filled by two Democrats for the first time since 1953 in 2020.

Data from OpenSecrets further shows Masters outraised by incumbent Sen. Mark Kelly 10 to 1, compared to Vance who has been outraised by Ohio Democrat Rep. Tim Ryan nearly 6 to 1.

McConnell’s decision to pull $8 million from Masters drew criticism from Senate rivals who called out the Republican leader for aiming to re-elect a minority the Kentucky lawmaker can control as opposed to a fractured majority. Masters pledged during the Arizona Republican Senate debate not to back McConnell for another term at the top of GOP leadership. In August, McConnell complained about candidate quality among his own party going into the fall midterms.

“I think there’s probably a greater likelihood the House flips than the Senate. Senate races are just different, they’re statewide, candidate quality has a lot to do with the outcome,” McConnell said on Fox News.

McConnell attempted to pre-emptively foil criticism over Arizona spending by also taking an axe to planned ads for Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a key Senate ally who faces a tough challenge from Trump-endorsed Kelly Tshibaka. Tshibaka has also promised not to support McConnell for another term in leadership.

McConnell canceled about $1.7 million in the relatively inexpensive Alaskan media market, although Murkowski maintains a steep financial advantage over the rest of the field with more than $9 million raised to Tshibaka’s less than $3.5 million, according to OpenSecrets. Murkowski is also running with the incumbent advantage amid a new system of ranked-choice voting.

Days after McConnell pulled ad spending on Masters in Arizona, Florida Republican Sen. Rick Scott blasted the minority leader in the Washington Examiner.

“We have great candidates with incredible backgrounds and ideas to make our country better,” Scott wrote. “Do I wish they had more money than their Democratic opponent? Of course. But we have great candidates, chosen by the voters in their states, and our job is to help each one of them win.”

Last week, McConnell attempted an effort at capitulation by announcing he would attend a second fundraiser for Masters sometime in September. Showing up to an event, however, is far from the same as putting $8 million into a competitive race.

Anderson made clear during her interview with The Federalist that the seven-figure bid to bolster Masters in Arizona was not a response to McConnell’s decision to strip spending.

“[The] announcement today is a response to grassroots activists with the Sentinel,” Anderson said, emphasizing Arizona has always been on their map.

In July, the Sentinel Action Fund ran a $400,000 ad campaign that attacked Kelly’s embrace of President Joe Biden’s energy agenda fueling record-high gas prices.

“I think we were created for moments like this when the party is divided on who to support. We can come in and support the conservative candidate who is going to come in and lead the state’s voters,” Anderson added.

The $5 million-dollar campaign dump is a likely relief to grassroots Republicans aiming to bring down Kelly and flip the Senate.

“Jessica Anderson and her team at Heritage Action have built a serious and formidable operation and are making the right call by investing in Blake Masters,” Terry Schilling, the president of the conservative American Principles Project, told The Federalist. “Blake is one of the few politicians who will actually deliver for families and it’s why groups like American Principles Project and Heritage are each pledging 7-figure investments to help him get elected. This election will be the ‘Revenge of the Parents.’ Anti-family Democrats should be very worried.”


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)