Twitter Files: FBI Assisted Ukraine in Targeting Journalists and Others for Censorship

Twitter continues to reveal the extensive censorship system created by government and corporate officials despite continued efforts from the left to drain the company of revenue. (The latest company to cancel Twitter is Ben & Jerry’s which objected to the company’s greater protections for free speech as allowing harmful views to be heard on social media). However, Elon Musk is undeterred and has continued to reduce censorship on the platform while letting the public see what the government has been doing behind the scenes on social media. The latest disclosure is astonishing. The FBI not only targeted individuals that it wanted banned for dissenting views, but it also was enlisted by Ukraine to target its own critics.

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has long been criticized for arresting opponents, shutting down opposing parties, and extensive censorship. It was not previously known that the FBI assisted it in the censorship effort, including targeting a number of journalists in America and abroad.

Journalist Aaron Maté reported that the FBI served as an intermediary on these efforts to censor critics.

In March 2022, an FBI Special Agent sent Twitter a list of accounts on behalf of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), Ukraine’s main intelligence agency. The accounts, the FBI wrote, “are suspected by the SBU in spreading fear and disinformation.” In an attached memo, the SBU asked Twitter to remove the accounts and hand over their user data.

The Ukrainian government’s FBI-enabled targets extend to members of the media. The SBU list that the FBI provided to Twitter included my name and Twitter profile. In its response to the FBI, Twitter agreed to review the accounts for “inauthenticity” but raised concerns about the inclusion of me and other “American and Canadian journalists.”

Previous disclosures have shown an extensive censorship and blacklisting effort. Despite such evidence of direct government censorship efforts, Democratic members continue to oppose attempts to expose the full scope of such government programs and grants.  Witnesses who testified about the dangers of such censorship efforts were even denounced as “Putin lovers” and apologists for insurrectionists and racists by leading Democrats.

Even with the targeting of journalists on behalf of a foreign government, most reporters have shrugged and declined to cover this story. It is another example of a de facto state media where journalists support a government by consent rather than coercion.

This would seem a major story on how U.S. citizens are sending tens of billions to Ukraine as Ukraine seeks the censorship of U.S. citizens and others for their criticism or viewpoints.

Twitter has itself been criticized for censorship material under pressure from China. Those are deeply concerning allegations, though it is clear that the level of censorship on the platform has been dramatically reduced with Musk’s removal of much of the corporate censorship infrastructure.

Democrats in Congress are even more open in opposing any investigation into the censorship, particularly after past releases implicated figures like Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Cal.) in targeting critics. The Democratic leadership has opposed any investigations for years. They have even refused to accept the email evidence. When I testified on the Twitter Files, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) criticized me for offering “legal opinions” without actually working at Twitter. As I have noted, it is like saying that a witness should not discuss the contents of the Pentagon Papers unless he worked at the Pentagon. It was particularly bizarre because I was asked about the content of the Twitter Files.  The content — like the content of the Pentagon Papers — are “facts.” The implication of those facts are opinions.

Members like Wasserman Schultz will likely continue to refuse to acknowledge these new emails. However, the public has repeatedly shown in polls that they want transparency on the censorship efforts.

The most important thing to keep in mind is that companies like Facebook have steadfastly refused to be as transparent as Twitter, which is smaller than other social media companies. These other companies likely have equally, if not greater, systems of coordination with the federal government. However, those executives are not allowing the public to know how their companies engaged in censorship by surrogate.

159 thoughts on “Twitter Files: FBI Assisted Ukraine in Targeting Journalists and Others for Censorship”

  1. Bug is making all sorts of insults yet is too stupid to answer the question. What obstruction?

    His responses get deleted, but he is a know-nothing so nothing is lost. He then sulks into his closet playing with his deflated basket balls. Bug is a sicko.

  2. “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

    – Declaration of Independence, 1776

    1. Real President Donald J. Trump indicted by totally corrupt and “fake” un-president Joe Biden.

      1. Trump lost the election. Get over it.

        And assuming that Trump’s statement about being indicted is true, he was indicted by Special Counsel Jack Smith, and Biden had nothing to do with it.

      1. Mespo, et al.,

        The Commie/Fascist Obama/Biden/Hilary/Pelosi/McConnell,etc., are on their last leg, throwing everything & the kitchen sink in to attempt to cover up their crimes against American Citizens.

        I think it won’t work this time.

        I kept seeing Tucker Carlson was getting 3-4 million viewers a night for years, he gets fired & goes on Twitter for a 10 minute 1st time show & gets at least 104 Million views. No he’s back. I guess he’s cleared things with his lawyers.

        I think it shows the people know now old media are lairs & most people are done with them now.

        As Ret. Fm head of Pfizer Vax Dept Michael Yeadon said about the CV19 Vax, how many times are you going to go back to your doctor after the 1st time you know he laid to you? sic

  3. Jonathan: Opps! Just for the record. I forgot to add my name to my post (6/8 @ 2:57 pm). So, it was posted as “Anonymous”. I like to get credit for my exhaustive research so I don’t want the other “Anonymous” to get credit for my work. But I don’t think many on this blog would mistake me for the other one!

    1. The corrupt Biden DOJ, lead by partisan hack AG Garland, just indicted Trump for fabricated “records” crimes to distract us from the proof that emerged today that Joe Biden committed *actual* high crimes and misdemeanors. THAT is what is happening today in Joe Biden’s 3rd world banana republic.

      1. yup

        ALX 🇺🇸
        BREAKING: Donald Trump to be indicted, summoned to appear in court on Tuesday

        Elon Musk
        There does seem to be far higher interest in pursuing Trump compared to other people in politics.
        Very important that the justice system rebut what appears to be differential enforcement or they will lose public trust.

        ALX 🇺🇸
        The fact that the establishment and intelligence agencies have been going after him since 2015 speaks volumes.
        If the regime is relentlessly pursuing someone, it tells you everything you need to know.
        7:44 PM · Jun 8, 2023

        1. F*ck Mitch McConnell and his, and all the rest of the Republican caucus’ inexusable silence.

    1. MAGA will never vote for Pence and Pence cannot win without the support of MAGA — which he will never have. Judas Pence…..

      Why did Congress change the Electoral College Act in 2022 if Pence could not do what he was charged with doing?

      1. Why did Congress change the Electoral College Act in 2022 if Pence could not do what he was charged with doing?

        This is proof against what ever Georgia prosecutors are after. The establishment of a slate of electors….ready to be approved by the Legislature(people) if the legislature refused to accept the certification of the election from the SoS. There is no crime in the action of forming an alternate slate of electors. There would be no crime if the legislature certified those electors.

        And Yes, If Pence did not have the power to reject a States electors, there would be no need to create new law.

      2. Not a Judas, and they changed it to make it clear even to people like Trump.

        I don’t want Pence in office, but am glad to see him calling Trump out for his weakness.

        1. they changed it to make it clear even to people like Trump.

          No. Its because State legislatures have power to reject an election certified by the Secretary of State. Thus the State legislature has the power to send a new slate of electors to DC. Trumps plan was to form a new slate of elector…to be certified by the Legislature. All within the structure of electing a President. That means Trump cant be prosecuted for helping form the alternate electors…the check and balence is in the hands of PEOPLE. Because all power origninates with the PEOPLE.

  4. Jonathan: And what is happening on the judicial front? A topic you often address in your columns. In a remarkable decision the SC just handed down a major victory for Black voters who challenged a GOP-drawn electoral map in Alabama that racially discriminated against Black voters and diluted their voting power. It was a 5-4 ruling authored by Chief Justice Roberts joined by Justices Bret Kavanaugh (surprise!), Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Despite the efforts by Thomas and Alito to gut the Voting Rights Act it is still alive and well.

    But Roberts is having trouble getting all the Justices to comply with the Court’s ethic rules. Yesterday all the Justices’ annual financial disclosure statements were made public–all but those of Thomas and Alito. They both asked for extensions. We probably know why Thomas asked for an extension. It’s the “Harlan Crow problem”. Two Senate Committees are looking into all the “gifts” Crow bestowed on Thomas. Crow’s attorney, Michael Bopp, has agreed to meet with the Judiciary Committee to discuss their request for Crow to provide detailed information about all his “gifts” to Thomas. I doubt Crow will agree to voluntarily comply. But Thomas is probably playing it safe. He doesn’t want to contradict anything his benefactor may have to eventually disclose to the Senate. And Thomas has a lot to hide!

    1. President Biden was asked by a White House reporter today whether or not he “sold out the country” with his family’s business deals (aka “bribes”).

      Biden’s response? “Where’s the money?” Then he laughed and said, “just kidding.”

      What Joe thinks is funny is that he and his family hid the money in the DOZENS of LLCs and shell companies they created to HIDE THE MONEY for a long, long, long time.

      So Dennis, everything you are talking about is 100% distraction. Look over there! UFOs! Trump! Climate change!

      Whatever you do, do NOT look at the criminal sitting in the White House who needs to face impeachment, prosecution and prison time.

      Oh and we can be certain there will be little to no coverage of “Biden’s bribes” on your MSLSD brainwashing propaganda cable channel tonight.

      1. @ ‘where’s the money’

        Sometimes, it’s difficult to tell if Joe is joking around, lying or just telling the truth (which he ‘choses over facts’.). That’s number one.

        Number two, can be as bad as number one.

        *literally, Joe may need someone to show him the money.

        1. Literally, Joe laughs because he knows they can’t “find” the money if they won’t even look for the money. Where’s the special counsel?DOJ/FBI have known about this for 6+ years. No one is “looking” for anything. That’s why Joe laughs with his snide “where’s the money? haha”…he simply gives a big FU to the media and to the country. Then he watches his corrupt DOJ unlawfully prosecute his political enemies.

          What a disgusting dirtbag, piece of corrupt scum Biden is.

    2. Speaking of “a lot to hide!”…..Biden has a LOT to hide. In just this one bribery case, Joe got $5 million and Hunter also got $5 million. That’s just one “deal” in Ukraine! Then there is China, Romania, etc…..all hidden in a web of shell companies created by the Biden’s to hide their criminality and treason.

      Fortunately for Biden, the media is helping him hide it, so you probably won’t hear much about it.
      The DOJ is helping to hide it. So is the FBI. So is his Treasury dept. So is his IRS. So is the entire Democrat party.

      Meanwhile, they are leaking out that Trump is about to be UNLAWFULLY indicted over some documents he was legally entitled to have.

      God bless America, eh Dennis?

  5. Jonathan: Now that we have gotten past the latest made for TV “Twitter Files” episode what else in in the news you have tried to avoid? Quite a bit actually.

    I have already discussed the imminent criminal indictments of Donald Trump by SC Jack Smith. As I mentioned Trump is desperate to prevent them and I speculated he would try to get the GOP House to protect him. Jim Jordan got the message and, on cue, he is now demanding the DOJ break down the scope of Smith’s authority to investigate the Trumpster. Jordan wants the DOJ’s original memo authorizing Jack Smith to investigate Jan. 6 and the Mar-a-Lago doc cases. AG Garland already detailed Smith’s scope of authority in a press conference back in November of last year. Jordan is also demanding the names of FBI personnel involved in the multi-probed investigation. I think the DOJ will tell Jordan to pound dirt. Jordan has no legislative authority to intervene in an ongoing criminal investigation.

    I doubt Jordan will have any better success than the three Trump attorneys who met with Smith’s team on Monday. They also tried to halt the investigation of their client but came away empty handed. Prosecutors are now looking into whether the draining of a pool that flooded a Mar-a-Lago room that stored computer servers with surveillance footage data was done intentionally. Smith is leaving no stone uncovered. Trump has now been notified he is a “target” in Smith’s investigation and Trump may soon be looking for a better class of lawyers than he now has to defend him. If he can find any!

    1. Who cares….I will support Trump no matter what they come up with. Why? Because they crossed all my lines long ago. They are sick, obsessed, disgusting, dangerous. We are on the road to fascism.

  6. Jonathan: So it’s back to the “Twitter Files”–your claim that the FBI was engaged in a vast “censorship” system. So far Jim Jordan has been unable to prove conservatives were censored under the old Twitter management. So you now turn to Aron Mate, a Canadian US based journalist to try to reinforced you unsubstantiated claims.

    And who is Aron Mate that you think is a credible for all things Twitter? For starters, Mate is known for his apologetic coverage of Putin’s war in Ukraine. Just look at his podcasts on his “Pushback” show hosted by the “Grayzone” podcast. Grayzone is big on conspiracy theories. It’s founder, Max Blumenthal, attended the 2015 10 yr anniversary of RT, one of Russia’s state media news organizations. Blumenthal is also well known for his apologetic coverage of the Putin regime.

    With this background why do you think Mate is a particularly reliable source on the Twitter Files? Did he have access to all or any of the files Elon Musk has chosen to selectively reveal? You still seem sensitive to Rep. Wasserman’s critique of your expertise on the Twitter files since your “legal opinions” were not based on any firsthand analysis of the Twitter Files–but mostly just press reporting. So if the “bull dog” Jim Jordan can’t prove any “extensive censorship system” of Twitter what makes you think you are going to have any better luck? The Twitter Files story has long past it’s prime and you should just let it die a natural death!

    1. Turley makes the absurd claim that there is an “extensive censorship system created by government and corporate officials despite continued efforts from the left to drain the company [Twitter] of revenue”, based on the flimsy premise that a list of accounts spreading “fear and disinformation”, including Turley’s Twitter account, was reported to Twitter. In response, Twitter “agreed to review the accounts for “inauthenticity””. That’s it. Just how does identifying accounts that might be spreading “fear and disinformation” somehow morph into an “extensive censorship system created by government officials”? I don’t get it, other than the fact that Turley is paid to use his credentials to bolster to Fox’s agenda of claiming there is an “extensive censorship system created by the government”, all for the purpose of spreading “fear and disinformation” to the disciples of alt-right. . This over-the-top analysis, is, itself, the very definition of “disinformation”. The government isn’t “censoring” anyone, including Twitter. The far-right just can’t stand the fact that neither Durham nor Jordan has come up with anything. Jordan has actually said he’s going to try to go back and investigate Hillary Clinton, who was last on the public scene in 2016, which is 7 years ago. She was investigated over the e-mail matter, and found not to have any criminal intent, but the right just HAS to do something, anything, as a distraction against Trump’s crimes, so they trot out Turley’s “Hunter Biden Scandal” on a regular basis, and now, the “extensive government censorship” malarkey. More chum for the disciples.

    2. –your claim that the FBI was engaged in a vast “censorship” system. So far Jim Jordan has been unable to prove conservatives were censored under the old Twitter management.

      Thats a shabby strawman you built there Dennis

    3. With this background why do you think Mate is a particularly reliable source
      More reliable than Christopher Steele, Or James Clapper, or James Comey.

      1. “Aaron Mate is one of the (few) honorable journalists on the Left who questioned the Russiagate hoax.”

        100% correct. Mate is a lefty, but he is an ethical journalist and he is an “actual” journalist.

  7. Wasserman Schultz
    thought she had been replaced in the House until I heard her question you. She was an idiot in the past and she was an idiot then

    1. DWS acts like a mobster. Remember the DNC convention 2015, what she and HRC did? Just ask Tulsi Gabbard. Debbie is a bully and very reckless. She made a fool of herself again this week in the weaponization committee hearing. Charts and attacks on the witness, very distasteful, crude,

  8. The CIA is supposed to be in charge of investigating the acts of other nations in opposition to the U.S. The FBI is supposed to be concerned with domestic crime in America. Since when is it the job of the FBI to take on the mission of the CIA by working with the Ukrainians to censor American citizens. The question that must come to mind is has FBI been working with China to suppress the Hunter laptop? Knowing that the FBI worked with Ukraine to censor Americans why should the possibility of the FBI working with China be ruled out. After all, the FBI worked with a Russian agent to smear Donald Trump.

  9. Ben and Jerry sold out of that business 23 years ago. It’s owned by the UK/Netherlands-based Unilever soap manufacturer, which makes most of its crap products in China and which has cut off the Israeli distributor of the ice cream because it’s anti-semitic. Explains it all

    1. while they may have sold the company to Unilever they still played a strong role in the company

  10. Is this part of the fight for “democracy” in Ukraine. And we are risking WW3 for who controls Donabass and a country most could not find on a map 18 months ago.

    Isn’t it ironic that many of the same people who accused you of “killing” grandma if you didn’t wear a mask are the same people who want to escalate a military situation with a nuclear armed country. Maybe covid is more dangerous than nuclear war?

    What a joke but a dangerous one.

    I am sorry about what has happened in Ukraine but it isn’t my problem.

    And no, I’m not a “stooge” of Putin.


    1. Are you suggesting the US, itself a nuclear power, kowtow to any other nuclear nation that tries to coerce us?
      I’m not interested in “lo-info” opinions, in this case, from people who don’t know the history of Easter Europe, and the remarkable, peaceful abandonment of Communist dictatorship since 1989. Poland, Slovakia, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Bulgaria are enjoying prosperity and freedom. Ukraine has similar aspirations and desires. This poses a big sore-spot for Putin’s autocratic, police-state kleptocracy. If Ukraine were allowed to be democratic, develop a rule-of-law business culture, purge corruption from govt. — and as a result outperform Russia economically — that would pose a great threat of the Russian people choosing the same for Russia. And that would mean ousting Putin and clawing back the billions in fraudulantly obtained wealth.

      Our national security is based in large part on how many friends the US can count on in a conflict.

      All the nations I listed are friends — they can count on us. Have you notices the Ukrainians do the fighting?
      It’s essential that Putin fail to steal land from Ukraine, sending a message to Xi JinPing about territorial military aggression, and how bad it can backfire on the aggressor.

      1. I’m quite familiar with the history of Eastern Europe.

        How would you feel if china or russia wanted to establish military bases in Mexico? Bet you wouldn’t approve of it, regardless of the aspirations of the Mexican people.

        The fight for “democracy” in Ukraine has little to do with US actions there. Weakening Russia has a lot to do with it.

        Sorry this isn’t Syria, Iraq or some banana republic.

        From John Mearsheimer U of Chicago:



      2. “If Ukraine were allowed to be democratic, ”

        Ya to bad the current Ukraine Govt is pack Authoritarian Nazi Azzholes supported by some in our US govt. ie: Biden’s Handlers, Lindsey Graham etc


        The New York Times has been forced to very, very belatedly deal with something which had long been obvious and known to many independent analysts and media outlets, but which has been carefully shielded from the mainstream masses in the West for obvious reasons.

        The surprising Monday Times headline said that “Nazi Symbols on Ukraine’s Front Lines Highlight Thorny Issues of History.” This acknowledgement comes after literally years of primarily indy journalists and geopolitical commentators pointing out that yes indeed… Ukraine’s military and paramilitary groups, especially those operating in the east since at least 2014, have a serious Nazi ideology problem. This has been exhaustively documented, again, going back years. But the report, which merely tries to downplay it as a “thorny issue” of Ukraine’s “unique” “History” – suggests that the real problem for Western PR is fundamentally that it’s being displayed so openly. Ukrainian troops are being asked to cover those Nazi symbols please!–as Matt Taibbi sarcastically quipped in commenting on the report.

  11. Dear Prof Turley,

    It’s worse than you think. The Office of President Zelenskiy, fully funded by the U.S., also runs a ‘hit’ list of purveyors of ‘disinformation’ and traitors to Ukraine (i.e. his government in Kiev) anywhere in the world. I believe Aaron Matte’ is on that list too. I believe Ex UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter, who resides in NY, is at top of that list.

    Btw, if the congressional Oversite Committees repeated request(s) for the FBI unclassified Form FD 1023 alleging a $5 million ‘bride’ to VP Biden has *Anything* to do with Ukraine, I move for immediate articles of impeachment against Joe Biden and a ‘ceasefire’ in that devastated, worn-torn country.

    *Im confident the ‘Russians’ are [still] looking for Somebody, Anybody willing and able to negotiate peace in Ukraine.

  12. Does this not bother anyone? Government censorship for political purposes? Regardless of it being Ukraine (stick any country here), how is this good? What does it mean to be inauthentic? Someone does not agree? How about a lie? If that is the case, should every politician be removed from social media, not just the ones you do not like? It is what they do, speak in half truths and hyperbole.

    It is not in the people’s interest to have the government act as censor.

    So when one is now accused of hate, violence, or terror for their opinion, think about it this way. This is not the first time we have been through this idiocy, if you are the type that thinks the fact big media is working with the Government to tamp down opinions you do not like, it is not the first time. I remember a time called McCarthyism. Truth died there too. I wonder how that resolved itself.

    A history lesson: Whips change hands and memory runs long…

    1. Does this not bother anyone?

      I have to assume that was rhetorical Quite Man. When JT hasn’t been posting (and us commenting) about the deepening corruption within the administrative state, he’s been laser-focused on the precipitous decline of free speech and the active measures deployed to target conservatives through disinformation, misinformation and outright censorship campaigns.

      So in a word. Absolutely!

  13. The government knows what it cannot censor. But certain components thereof know how to circumvent those restrictions (either directly or via surrogacy) and prevent publication of material which goes beyond that which is unprotected under the First Amendment. SCOTUS has often spoken of a First Amendment right not only to speak/publish/protest, but also to RECEIVE information.
    SCOTUS Justice Brennan expressly noted that, “The protection of the Bill of Rights goes beyond the specific guarantees to protect from Congressional abridgment those equally fundamental personal rights necessary to make the express guarantees fully meaningful. I think the right to receive publications is such a fundamental right. The dissemination of ideas can accomplish nothing if otherwise-willing addressees are not free to receive and consider them.” Lamont v. Postmaster General, 381 U.S. 301 (1965).

    I believe the focus should be on the other side: a reinforcement of ACTIONABLE CONDUCT against MEDIA and its collusive cohorts -including officials/members of government (see note below about governmental immunity) for:
    (1) intentional distortion of fact, constituting propaganda;
    (2) selective fact-reporting intended to influence/cause a particular perception or conclusion;
    (3) AND censorship of material where it is shown that the main intent is the suppression or elimination of information contrary to a desired political or societal agenda.

    We have defamation laws to protect against harming individuals or entities, but we have little to protect the public-at-large against propaganda and selective facts intended to influence/distort public opinion or perception of reality.
    Since the “victims” are mostly members of the public at large (the targeted audience who RELY on the receipt of information and therefore may read/view/listen to propagandistic or selective/distorted information), I also would support putative class-action by the public at large for such conduct.
    AND, since “We the People” (who can sue each other) connotes that we are the government, then there should be no governmental immunity for persons or divisions/departments/entities that engage in such conduct.

    1. Lin: let’s see, now, you quote Brennan as saying: ““The protection of the Bill of Rights goes beyond the specific guarantees to protect from Congressional abridgment those equally fundamental personal rights necessary to make the express guarantees fully meaningful.” Then, explain to me just HOW and WHY the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, which isn’t listed in the Bill of Rights, is no longer the law of the land after being so for 50 years? That was one of Alito’s excuses for overturning Roe v. Wade. How do the express guarantees of liberty and privacy not cover the right to bodily autonomy and private medical decisionmaking prior to the age of fetal viability? Or, is this just another BS claim of Constitutional interpretation that is twisted to end up at the desired result?

      1. Gigi: I gladly accept your challenge, even though it its thoroughly off-topic. As to your question to me, “Then, explain to me just HOW and WHY the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, which isn’t listed in the Bill of Rights, is no longer the law of the land after being so for 50 years,?” I respectfully respond as follows:
        (1) Brennan noted that the First Amendment necessarily includes the corollary/appurtenant right to receive speech. You have every right, dear Gigi, to speak and protest about your views on abortion, and I and others have every right to receive/hear your speech. The comparison ends there.
        (2) You have adopted the extremist position on what Dobbs said. Nowhere did Dobbs rule that abortion was unconstitutional.
        ( -as you know,-for comparison, six decades after the fact, SCOTUS (in Brown v. Bd. of Ed.) found one of its previous conclusions (in Plessy) as unconstitutional and overruled/reversed itself, i.e., separate but equal ruling violated the equal protection clause of 14th Amendment.)
        Please read the Dobbs decision for a better understanding of what it actually says and does not say. (hint: “The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”)

        1. P.S. You didn’t mention Casey already overruling parts of Roe. I believe Casey had already overruled Roe as to a trimester/viability standard, and instead ruled that the criterion should be “undue burden” on the mother. Dobbs merely found both cases had overstepped a perceived authority to “legislate from the bench” -and returned abortion decisions to the states/people, where it had been for something like 170 years prior to Roe. I repeat, Dobbs did NOT rule that abortion was unconstitutional.

      2. Then, explain to me just HOW and WHY the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, which isn’t listed in the Bill of Rights, is no longer the law of the land after being so for 50 years?

        lin, as usual, cites the nuts and bolts of constitutional law.
        I’ll do more of a civics lesson. A 33,000 foot view of self governance.

        Power flows from the people. The Government has zero power, not delegated to it…BY THE PEOPLE.

        Rights ‘given’ to the people by the government, are subject to be taken back by the same government. (That was always, just one of the many flaws in Roe)

        The People could have passed a constitutional amendment, preventing the Govt from infringing on the right to abortion. The People did not identify this ‘Right’

        Dobbs did nothing, but return to the people, the power to self govern. Rather than be governed by 5 unelected Oracles in black robs.

        I have been lectured to for 50 years, the majority of Americans support abortion on demand. That means the people through their elected representatives will assure themselves of the access to abortion the majority desires.

        There is your simplified lesson in remedial Civics.

        You’re welcome.

  14. I just got off the phone with Elon Musk. Elon wants to send me on a SpaceX rocket for free. It will be a blast.

  15. I’m proposing a name change to the FBI from their former “Forever Bothing Italians” to the new FBE – “Forever Bothering Everyone.”

  16. I haven’t bought Ben and Jerry’s in a decade, I guess I was ahead of my time. Let’s give B & J the Bud Light/Target treatment and cause them to lose billions like the two I just mentioned.

    Ben and Jerry, the Bud Light of ice cream. STOP GIVING MONEY TO COMPANIES/GROUPS THAT SUPPORT THE THINGS YOU HATE. They are our enemy, stop supporting them!

    1. HullBobby,
      I have been boycotting Ben and Jerry’s for so long, I can no longer when I started.
      I am boycotting any and all AHB products.
      I can honestly say I do not recall the last time I was in a Target, but I will participate in that boycott as well.

Leave a Reply