“Shredding The Fabric Of Our Democracy”: Biden Aide Signals Push For Greater Censorship On The Internet

We have been discussing the calls for top Democrats for increased private censorship on social media and the Internet.  President-elect Joe Biden has himself called for such censorship, including blocking President Donald Trump’s criticism of mail-in voting. Now, shortly after the election, one of Biden’s top aides is ramping up calls for a crackdown on Facebook for allowing Facebook users to read views that he considers misleading — users who signed up to hear from these individuals.  Bill Russo, a deputy communications director on Biden’s campaign press team, tweeted late Monday that Facebook “is shredding the fabric of our democracy” by allowing such views to be shared freely.

Russo tweeted that “If you thought disinformation on Facebook was a problem during our election, just wait until you see how it is shredding the fabric of our democracy in the days after.” Russo objected to the fact that, unlike Twitter, Facebook did not move against statements that he and the campaign viewed as “misleading.” He concluded. “We pleaded with Facebook for over a year to be serious about these problems. They have not. Our democracy is on the line. We need answers.”

For those of us in the free speech community, these threats are chilling. We saw incredible abuses before the election in Twitter barring access to a true story in the New York Post about Hunter Biden and his alleged global influence peddling scheme. Notably, no one in the Biden camp (including Biden himself) thought that it was a threat to our democracy to have Twitter block the story (while later admitting that it was a mistake).

I have previously objected to such regulation of speech. What is most disturbing is how liberals have embraced censorship and even declared that “China was right” on Internet controls. Many Democrats have fallen back on the false narrative that the First Amendment does not regulate private companies so this is not an attack on free speech. Free speech is a human right that is not solely based or exclusively defined by the First Amendment.  Censorship by Internet companies is a “Little Brother” threat long discussed by free speech advocates.  Some may willingly embrace corporate speech controls but it is still a denial of free speech.

This is why I recently described myself as an Internet Originalist:

The alternative is “internet originalism” — no censorship. If social media companies returned to their original roles, there would be no slippery slope of political bias or opportunism; they would assume the same status as telephone companies. We do not need companies to protect us from harmful or “misleading” thoughts. The solution to bad speech is more speech, not approved speech.

If Pelosi demanded that Verizon or Sprint interrupt calls to stop people saying false or misleading things, the public would be outraged. Twitter serves the same communicative function between consenting parties; it simply allows thousands of people to participate in such digital exchanges. Those people do not sign up to exchange thoughts only to have Dorsey or some other internet overlord monitor their conversations and “protect” them from errant or harmful thoughts.

Russo’s comments mirror the comments of other Democrats who are seeking greater censorship. Indeed, in the recent Senate hearing on Twitter’s suppression of the Biden story, Democratic senators ignored the admissions of Big Tech CEOs that they were wrong to bar the story and, instead, insisted that the CEOs pledge to substantially increase such censorship. Senator Jacky Rosen warned the CEOS that “you are not doing enough” to prevent “disinformation, conspiracy theories and hate speech on your platforms.”

Again, as someone raised in a deeply liberal and Democratic family in Chicago, I do not know when the Democratic party became the party for censorship. However, limiting free speech is now a rallying cry for Democratic members and activists alike. At risk is the single greatest invention for free speech since the printing press.  Russo’s comments reaffirms that the Biden Administration will continue this assault against Internet free speech.  What is most unnerving is that Russo is denouncing such free speech as “shredding the fabric of our democracy.” There was a time when free speech was the very right that we fought to protect in our democratic system.  It was one of the defining principles of our Constitution system. It is now being treated as a threat to that system.

165 thoughts on ““Shredding The Fabric Of Our Democracy”: Biden Aide Signals Push For Greater Censorship On The Internet”

  1. Free speech was the first element in the Bill of Rights for our new nation and I question anyone restricting it, including the press which it protects…

  2. My sincere condolences to what’s happened to your party, Mr Turley. But censorship and isolation/arrest is what leftists do. The party of Bill Clinton is quite dead.

  3. This video shows many ways how vote computer fraud takes place. Vote switching is one way and is shown on the still from the video.
    The tabulation is a direct feed from the voting network.
    The bottom banner is CNN’s feed that is a second behind in updating.
    560 votes were deducted from Bevin and given to Beshear in that same moment.
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZeeSBwPmTwmW-7X8gNI2jzi8RjOuFXj7/view?usp=sharing

  4. Professor Turley Can You Tell Us..

    What’s Happening At The Pentagon?

    A slew of Pentagon officials resigned Tuesday, a day after President Trump fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper, spurring a leadership shakeup at the Defense Department.

    The new resignations came from the Pentagon’s top policy official James Anderson, the agency’s top intelligence official Joseph Kernan and Esper’s chief of staff Jen Stewart. All three submitted letters announcing their resignations, effective immediately.

    “I want to thank Dr. Anderson, Admiral Kernan and Jen Stewart for their service to the nation and the Department,” acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller said in a statement. “Over their careers each has contributed greatly to the national defense and the future of the Department of Defense. We wish them the best in their next endeavors.”

    The swift exits, which come a day after Trump fired Esper via Twitter, have raised fears that the administration is looking to quickly fill the Pentagon with loyalists who can help push through controversial executive actions in the roughly 70 days before Trump must leave the White House.

    House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.) said Tuesday that it is “hard to overstate just how dangerous high-level turnover at the Department of Defense is during a period of presidential transition.”

    The resignations “could mark the beginning of a process of gutting the DoD – something that should alarm all Americans,” Smith said in a statement released after Anderson departed.

    “As soon as Former Vice President Biden became President-Elect Biden, President Trump and those loyal to him started to sow chaos and division. It appears that chaos has now reached the Pentagon.”

    Edited from: “Pentagon Sees Flurry Of Resignations After Trump Ousts Secretary”

    The Hill, 11/10/20

    1. PROFESSOR TURLEY:

      As a Trump defender you must understand how disturbing matters appear. The incumbent President refuses to acknowledge defeat. While at the same time, he shakes up The Pentagon. None of this is normal! It like the country is coming unglued.

    2. Trump campaigned on getting troops out of the forever wars of Iraq and Afghanistan. Trump had to fire about four generals to finally get someone to agree with him, but somehow we have troops not only still in Iraq and Afghanistan, but we still have troops in Syria and Libya.

      The pentagon works for the Pres, and if they can’t end wars he wants ended, he should keep firing people until he gets a pentagon that obeys the Pres. As a member of the allegedly anti war party (presumably) I would think you’d understand the dangers of a rouge pentagon.

  5. THIS IS WAR
    __________

    In 1861, President of the United States Abraham Lincoln took two steps intended to maintain order and public safety in the now-divided country.

    In his capacity as commander in chief, Lincoln declared martial law in all states and ordered the suspension of the constitutionally protected right to writs of habeas corpus in the state of Maryland and parts of the Midwestern states.

    – Robert Longley
    ______________

    Democrats have criminally engineered, corrupted and commandeered the U.S. election process commencing Civil War II.

    President Trump must declare martial law, suspend Habeas Corpus, prosecute the criminal election fraud perpetrators, seize voting apparatus in all 50 states and conduct a complete recount of “legal” votes.

  6. To anyone with a grip on reality, its obvious that — if anyone is to be censored — the big-time liars (both in terms of frequency and degree of mendacity) are MSM voices like NBC.

      1. “If you look at Florida where things were done right, you can see that that’s how the rest of the country should have gone.”

        “But they also used an algorithm to calculate the votes they would need to flip.”

        “And they used the computers to flip those votes from Trump to Biden.”

        “And from other republicans candidates to their competitors also. I think Doug Collins had the race stolen from him. I think John James had his race stolen from him.”

        “When the votes are really audited and the real votes are counted, Trump will win.”

        “He is the President and he is in charge of this country.”

        – Sidney Powell

Leave a Reply