Below is my column in the Hill on the recent report of the House Judiciary Committee and the disclosure of yet another effort to silence opposing viewpoints by squeezing the revenue of individuals or groups, including Elon Musk and Joe Rogan.
Here is the column:
Few Americans have ever heard of the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, let alone understand how it shapes what they read and hear in news and commentary. That may soon change.
An alarming new report of the House Judiciary Committee details this organization’s work to censor conservative and opposing viewpoints in the media by targeting figures such as Joe Rogan and entire social media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter).
It is part of a massive censorship system that a federal court recently described as “Orwellian.” The sophistication of this system makes authoritarian regimes like China’s and Iran’s look like mere amateurs in censorship and blacklisting.
In my new book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in the Age of Rage,” I discuss our history of speech crackdowns and how this is arguably the most dangerous anti-free speech period that we have faced as a nation. The reason is an unprecedented alliance of government, corporate, academic and media institutions supporting censorship and the targeting of largely conservative viewpoints.
As discussed in the book, there is a crushing irony to the current anti-free speech movement. During the Red Scare and the McCarthy period, it was the left that was targeted with blacklisting, censorship and arrests. It is now the left that has constructed a global censorship system that exceeds anything that Joe McCarthy even dreamt of in the control of news and commentary.
Through the years, I have testified repeatedly in Congress on this system supported enthusiastically by President Biden and his administration. It has proven to be a frustrating game of whack-a-mole for civil libertarians. The Democrats in Congress have uniformly opposed any investigation or action on censorship while denying for years that there was a coordinated effort between government and corporations. When we were successful in uncovering components of this system, they were often quickly shut down as the work shifted to other components and assets.
One of the most insidious efforts has been to strangle the financial life out of conservative or libertarian sites by targeting their donors and advertisers. This is where the left has excelled beyond anything that has come before in speech crackdowns.
Years ago, I wrote about the Biden administration supporting efforts like the Global Disinformation Index to discourage advertisers from supporting certain sites. All of the 10 riskiest sites targeted by the index were popular with conservatives, libertarians and independents. That included Reason.org and a group of libertarian and conservative law professors who simply write about cases and legal controversies. The Global Disinformation Index warned advertisers against “financially supporting disinformation online.” At the same time, HuffPost, a far-left media outlet, was included among the 10 sites at lowest risk of spreading disinformation.
Once that index’s work and bias was disclosed, government officials quickly disavowed the funding. It was a familiar pattern. Within a few years, we found that the work had been shifted instead to groups like the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, which is the same thing on steroids. It is the creation of a powerful and largely unknown group called the World Federation of Advertisers, which has huge sway over the advertising industry and was quickly used by liberal activists to silence opposing views and sites by cutting off their revenue streams.
These censorship groups typically proclaim that they are merely trying to promote “brand safety” when they target for suppression the same sites that challenge the political and media establishment. The group states that it “unites marketers, media agencies, media platforms, industry associations, and advertising technology solutions providers to safeguard the potential of digital media by reducing the availability and monetization of harmful content online.”
That “harmful content” seems to be the very same sites long targeted by the Biden administration and its allies in business, the media and academia.
The internal communications of these censorship groups demonstrate their contributors’ underlying agenda. In one conversation between Global Alliance for Responsible Media co-founder Rob Rakowitz and individuals with an associated “GroupM,” two executives explained to Rakowitz how they identified sites that they did not like and simply monitored them until they could find something that crossed the line. An example is the Daily Wire, a site hated by liberals for its conservative viewpoints and critiques of mainstream media.
In describing how they work to bag such sites, John Montgomery, executive vice president of Global Brand Safety, explained: “There is an interesting parallel here with Breitbart. Before Breitbart crossed the line and started spouting blatant misinformation, we had long discussions about whether we should include them on our exclusion lists. As much as we hated their ideology and bulls–t, we couldn’t really justify blocking them for misguided opinion. We watched them very carefully and it didn’t take long for them to cross the line.”
In other words, they preselected the sites and then followed their every move like a patrol unit following a car to wait for them to go one mile per hour over the limit.
This is called “deplatforming,” a favorite term from higher education, whereby liberal groups organize to shout down and block speakers with opposing views. The Global Alliance for Responsible Media is too sophisticated to simply bullhorn groups into silence. Instead, it strangles them financially.
Those who do not yield, from Elon Musk’s X to mega-podcaster Joe Rogan, were quickly added to the list to be deplatformed. Musk is particularly dangerous because he was responsible for blowing the lid off the censorship system by releasing the “Twitter Files,” detailing coordination between government and social media companies to silence citizens and groups.
To this day, companies like Facebook continue to fight efforts to disclose their own censorship files.
Musk has threatened to sue in light of the report. “Having seen the evidence unearthed today by Congress, X has no choice but to file suit against the perpetrators and collaborators in the advertising boycott racket,” he said.
A lawsuit would be difficult to maintain. These groups have a right to organize to silence opposing views just as book burners have a right to burn books. However, deplatforming, book burning and blacklisting have long been anathema to free speech values. They are efforts to prevent opposing views from being heard rather than to respond to such views on the merits.
And Musk is right in describing this as a “racket.” There is now a disinformation cottage industry where a wide array of academic and private groups are raking in a fortune targeting individuals and other groups for blacklisting, banning and censorship.
There are other groups working in tandem in this effort. For example, Newsguard was created by to Chief Executive Officers Steven Brill and Gordon Crovitz to monitor and effectively blacklist media that they deemed misinformative or false. The site uses mainstream journalists to rate news sites, even though many of these sites have challenged the bias of the mainstream media.
Once again, the apparatus serves to shield that bias in targeting disfavored sites. The Biden administration has extended contracts with Newsguard to incorporate the system, and it is even being used in schools, despite complaints that it shows the very same pro-Democrat and left-wing bias.
There is a reason why projects such as the Global Disinformation Index have been largely concealed from public view. There is a reason Facebook and other companies have fought mightily to conceal their own censorship files. The anti-free speech movement is not a popular movement.
A majority of the public continues to oppose censorship. This is a movement that came from higher education and has been pushed by the political and media establishment, not the public.
That is why many of us in the free speech community are hoping that the 2024 election will become a referendum on censorship. Biden has given a full-throated endorsement of these efforts, even to the point of claiming that companies that do not censor American citizens are “killing people.” He presides over the most anti-free speech administration since John Adams.
So now, let him defend it with voters.
In 1800, that did not work out well for Adams, who was defeated by Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson had run on restoring freedom of speech. The public can now flip the script. It is time to defund and deplatform America’s censors.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” (Simon & Schuster, June 18, 2024).
J.D. Vance is pervasively and maximally innocuous.
Idiot^^^^
Oh, and eminently intellectual and sympathetic!
WHAT A GREAT CHOICE!
“JD is kissing my ass!” Trump said to a laughing audience. “He wants my support so much.”
“During this election season, it appears that many Americans have reached for a new pain reliever.” He went on: “It enters minds, not through lungs or veins, but through eyes and ears, and its name is Donald Trump.” But, he argued, Mr. Trump was not the solution.
It is JD Vance for VP!
Probably a very good choice. I was leaning toward a couple of others, but at least is isn’t Haley or some other neocon symp. Now, if he just follows through and appoints Paxton AG after he is elected, we should get the gratification of seeing a number of heads roll (metaphorically speaking) in the swamp.
I appreciated his efforts to keep East Palestine in the spotlight and the terrible damage that was being done there. We’re about 17 or so miles downwind and despite what was being said you could see and smell it in the air.
One of the top snipers in the world does not believe the homicidal attack on President Trump could have been done without inside help, either someone turning a blind eye or someone providing active assistance.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13634219/Veteran-longest-confirmed-sniper-kill-Trump-assassination-attempt.html
Young, it kind of reminds me of Oswald– the perfect patsy who also happened to be a good shot. And, as with Oswald, he had to be killed quickly lest he talk. I am sure it is far-fetched but it did cross my mind.
@ Honest
Yeah, it is far-fetched and I don’t want to believe it…don’t even want to think it…but now I think Oswald may well have been a patsy, so much has come out since then. Now I can’t help but wonder how it was possible for this young killer to get in position in plain view of others and take any shots only to be killed when he missed and, maybe, had to be shut up for good, and quickly, Jack Ruby being unavailable.
Now we hear that the DEI head of the Secret Service was given the position at Jill’s insistence and that the A Team [if there really is one] was guarding Jill at a fundraiser while the F Team was sent to Trump.
Now, God help me, I can’t help wondering just how ruthless Jill is and how badly she wants to keep running the country. Crazy, I know, but nobody thinks Joe Strawbrained Scarecrow is deciding anything. Bizarre as those thoughts are, nothing that happened during the attempt on Trump is inconsistent with them.
I was remembering today where I was when Kennedy was shot, sitting with my mother in her living room watching Fred McMurray in ‘My Three Sons’ on her black and white television when the show was interrupted with a special announcement, shots fired at Kennedy, no information on his condition. I never did see the end of that gentle comedy but I think I saw the end of this country as I knew it.
Since then I think I have never watched a President or candidate speaking live. I wait until I am sure he is safe and watch the recording.
Dear Prof Turley,
Love your dedication to speech, and hope your book is a great success, but unless were talking about U.S. sovereign debt obligations, I’m not ‘conservative’ at all and they hate me .. . too!
(I’m more a ‘free spirit’ and would prefer the Ol Hippies ‘free sex, drugs and rock&roll’ Woodstock way .. . but somebody has to pay the bills.)
>” The reason is an unprecedented alliance of government, corporate, academic and media institutions supporting censorship and the targeting of largely conservative viewpoints.”
So, The ‘truth’ is not largely conservative viewpoints. If Joe Biden said the world is round and the sky is blue .. . I would have to go outside and see for myself.
Megan Fox has a great question:
“Where do I get one of these phones the FBI can’t get into?”
Believe nothing they say. This attempt on Trump’s life, and the nation, needs to be investigated openly and honestly, maybe by House investigators if no one else.
The FBI and Secret Service and DOJ need to be under the microscope, not in charge of it.
It may be absurd, but Musk buying Twitter is likely *literally* the only thing that saved our bacon, and why the hostility toward him exploded when he was formerly the left’s golden child. He kept the door open, and thankfully, many others are now walking through it (and most that now claim to despise him when prior they barely knew his name are impossible to have reasonable or intelligent conversations with about it – talk about lofo). All I can say is thank the gods he’s richer than any of them, that is like body armor in the way this is all played out in the 21st century, sadly. Believe that this is all a globalist agenda, because it is, and their intentions are designed to benefit *them*, not society; it’s the old aristocracy on steroids. It is getting tougher and tougher for all but the most insular or obtuse to deny. The rise of the Clintons, the Obamas, and the Soroses were one of the most pernicious things to happen to this world, if not in history, than in a very good, long, time.
Amen, the Clintons perfected the bribe, millions. They allocate federal funds to Universities then show up to give a 30 minute speech for $500k. That’s the tip of the iceberg, it started with them and has gotten worse ever since.
President Madison on his personal seal had the phrase “Veritas Non Verba Magistri” or one example in English: “Truth, not the words of a Master” sure seems appropriate in today’s discourse. Of course, truth is subservient to fact, or denial of fact in one’s quest to deceive, better described as an Obfuscating snake oil salesman, [Come One come All] I have the elixir that will sooth the reality of factual truth.
And no where in there did Madison imply that authoritative bodies, govts and corporations should “decide for us” what truth is.
In fact he’s saying just the opposite, that truth should prevail over a “masters words”.
Today the “masters words” come from the liberal media, the liberal govt and the tech giants who do their bidding.
@Chris
You forgot the unelected ‘liberal’ elite – they are equal partners, so to speak. The WEF, WHO, UN, et. al. Back then the elite were basically royalty or their progeny and that was that; you had to travel by ship and send letters, entire societies were basically largely unaware of one another. These aforementioned entities did not exist in the era of Madison, and neither did Silicon Valley, the www, mobile technology, social media, digital currency, or digitally controlled resources. We are wrestling with a similar beast, but it isn’t the *same* beast. 😐
Oh I haven’t forgotten them, and I agree the old oligarchy is how this all happens. They’re the ones behind the corporations, the tech giants, the industry and power that now controls our media and fascist warmongering government, or more aptly put the stooges they select to stand in the token roles of power.
In fact the whole idea behind the electoral college was to keep the elites as you call them, the oligarchs as I call them, from losing control of power should a bunch of poor dirt pig farmers get together and replace the Patricians with the Plebs.
Trust me, I haven’t forgotten them.
@Chris
I call them oligarchs, too, and agreed. It’s pretty clear who and why think the Electoral College is such a problem or why our Constitution needs to be ‘updated’ for the 21st century. Painful to see good people that actually do by and large think they are doing good to fall for all of the bloviating drivel that actually seeks to disenfranchise them. But it makes them feel moral and smart, and these days saving face and preserving their personal comfort are all that seems to matter to the modern left, electorate and ruling class alike. Very sad to me that the legitimate struggles of the past are just an hypothetical trope such folks pass around like a doobie. 🤷🏻♂️
I always thought the electoral college was to assure equal representation for each State. NY and California populations far exceed flyover States. The electoral college assures that NY and California don’t get to decide who the President is for the rest of America. That’s why the Communists hate it so much, don’t know how that keeps the “Oligarchs” in check. The Oligarchs have the money whoever wins, pig farmers or Kenyan goat herders.
Well sorry but you thought wrong Traveler. The electoral college was a compromise made by the founding fathers that they were not happy about, but wealthy elites who elected them wanted it to protect them should the poor dirt farmers get together and vote in one of their own.
So they forced a compromise, “the great compromise” as it was known giving what was effectively the Patricians the right to override the vote of the Plebs, given the framers of the Constitution wanted to leverage the structure of ancient Rome, but the wealthy landowners and oligarchs wouldn’t allow it. So they had to compromise.
Madison lamented this bow to sovereign govt in a letter to Jefferson, noting how they never really did get away from sovereign rule.
We’re still there. I don’t know what it will take to change that, but we never did get it all correct. We got a LOT of it, but the great compromise took the power out of the hands of the common people and put it back in the hands of the Patricians ensuring that if we ever did get a “poor dirt farmer” into a position to be elected President, that they could override it with a vote of their own.
Which is ironic, given that its the exact opposite of the structure the framers were trying to leverage. In ancient Rome there was a position Plebian Tribune, which was elected by the Plebeians and given immense power to protect the people.
Plebian Tribunes could not only help intervene between the senate and the people like some sort of advocate, they could literally veto laws passed by the senate. They could not only call for general assemblies of the Plebeians, they could actually summon the Senate into session. It was a very powerful role designed to protect the people from an authoritarian government.
But what the oligarchs and elites did here in our country was reverse that, and they gave themselves the role of Tribune in the medium of the electoral college. Therein they have ultimate power, should we ever get lucky enough to pick someone from among the people who is capable of the job and honest enough to protect the people, to override that.
They were terrified of one of us, being put in charge of them.
Weren’t the wealthy land owners the framers? Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton, Webster? They were all men of substantial wealth and means. Have you ever been to Monticello? The framers were well educated lawyers, inventors, statesmen. I believe it you to be so we can agree to disagree. My opinion the electoral college was brilliant and has saved America’s bacon on several occasions from Democrat tyranny, mob rule.
Unbelievable.
You’re clearly not capable of comprehending anything I wrote or you’d not ask such questions, but ok, let me help you;
1. I never said the framers weren’t wealthy, of course I’m familiar with their homes I’m from Virginia.
2. You’re talking about a handful of men. There were thousands of wealthy landowners in the colonies at the time.
3. Landowners were the only ones allowed to vote at the time, white land owners to be exact.
I’ve already taught you an amazing history lesson, you need to go back and study it and stop asking obtuse questions or posing obtuse statements.
The electoral college was meant to keep poor dirt farmers from power.
Period.
You truly are a dipshit.
oh look, the trolls angry…. .. coming from a little baby hiding behind a fake name and a keyboard, that means nothing.
and you’re welcome for the history lesson.
@Chris
So, actually, you are a troll, a rather classic one, actually (begin sensibly and then inject rhetoric as though filling a doughnut). Good to know. 👍🏼
Freshman? Master’s program? Professor perhaps?
And PS – yes, we all know about the Plebeians. And have for decades. Using that as a reference almost, not certainly, but almost, guarantees a poster of a certain, shall we say, vintage. 🤷🏽♂️
Did you get that son? 😂
Im in my 60’s and I cut trees! This jack leg called me a racist and a fascist a few months back.
No, you’re just a lying little troll hiding behind half a dozen handles or more, confusing me with one of your own ilk.
My profiles linked , I post as me and no one else. Because it keeps me honest, and it shows respect to the blog to show that at least “someone” is willing to actually post as themselves and not lurk daily in the corner like a worm, …..spitting out venom that they’re so ashamed of that they are afraid to put sign their own names to it.
Like you.
Ok Plebe😂
Professor? …
Not even close.
College student? I’m in my mid 60s son and I work for a living.
And why are you calling me a troll?
I use my own name, I post as myself and no one else, and i post only once in a while on my days off and I link to my social media profiles and my professional website as well as my YouTube channel, …I’m a tree cutter not a troll.
Which part of that eludes you?
I work for a living. I know that’s a foreign concept to this crowd, but there are a few of us old timers still out here and we still have a voice too and if you actually talk to us instead of trolling us you might find we know a thing or two.
The schoolboys and scholars in here aren’t the only ones who’ve ever cracked the spine of a book.
The motto of the British Royal Society is “Nullius in Verba”, Take no one’s word.
Now we have politicians asking if witnesses at hearings if they believe in science.
How does one say “We Are So Screwed” in Latin?
What do you think of Big Tech, fulfilling censorship demands of foreign governments in the US?
What about them doing that collusively as a monopoly?
This is what they signed in 2018: https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=54454
On September 26, 2018, the European Commission published a “self-regulatory” Code of Practice on Disinformation. On October 16, 2018 (yes, three weeks before the US elections) Google, Facebook, and Twitter, signed this Code of Practice. Microsoft joined in 2019. Much of the Code was targeted at the US, and is applied by Google, Facebook, and Twitter in the US.
https://defyccc.com/goog-fb-twtr-and-msft-are-foreign-agents-and-a-collusive-monopoly/
The Biden administration has also joined GIFCT – another international censorship group.
https://defyccc.com/invisible-hand-of-governments-gifct/
“[T]he work [of the censors] had been shifted instead to groups like the Global Alliance for Responsible Media [GARM] . . .” (JT)
For those who don’t know, GARM is a World Economic Forum (WEF) project.
Imagine that.
And, yes, the WEF does receive funding from governments all over the world, including the U.S.
Any evidence to support this?
What percentage of GARM’s budget is funded by US governmental support?
“Any evidence to support this?”
Yes.
“What percentage of GARM’s budget is funded by US governmental support?”
Ask the WEF.
Press release dated 10 July 2024
“GARM Exposed: House Judiciary Report Says Ad Coalition Likely Broke Law To Silence Conservatives”
https://judiciary.house.gov/media/in-the-news/garm-exposed-house-judiciary-report-says-ad-coalition-likely-broke-law-silence
You must not have read the report you linked. Those questions are not answered in it. It is mostly a legally baseless diatribe that makes an antitrust argument.
I thought you were a lawyer?
Did you notice the title says, “Likely Broke the Law?” Don’t think she was making any legal argument here, just noting the developing controversy surrounding GARM
Linked Article raises questions, not tries to answer them. This is a committee hearing, not decisive action.
Wife and I know of Ben Shapiro, who testified at above committee hearing. UCLA with a B.A. degree, summa cum laude. Harvard Law School, with a J.D., cum laude.
What are your credentials, other than jumping on comments you don’t like. Want to weigh your opinion against his?
https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/14/berkeley-braces-for-ben-who-is-ben-shapiro/
Dear Mr. Turley, my thanks to “old Airborne Dog” and his excellent taken down of D. McIntyre. It is funny how when the shoe is on the other foot, the Liberals can’t take it. Their problem is the Liberals are unable to look past their collective noses and see they aren’t as perfect as they claim to be. All of the Liberal lies and distortions these past 8 years regarding Mr. Trump have not succeeded. They were aided by a complaint press. This along with the scolding of Mrs. Clinton has been wasted time and breath.
To me the fact that they are interfering NOT with free speech, but with the profitability of a platform makes the lawsuit one of commerce vs. free speech.
Speech that falsely accuses which then has a monetary consequence to a person or entity is no different than what was done to Sandman. Of course for him it was reputation and livelihood (death threats), but for Musk, Daily Wire, etc… it is false accusations which affect their ability to conduct commerce.
In the same light, ESPECIALLY after the rulings against Alex Jones, Trump should be able to go after ANY entity that falsely accuses his assassination attempt of being staged.
In the same light, ESPECIALLY after the rulings against Alex Jones, Trump should be able to go after ANY entity that falsely accuses his assassination attempt of being staged.
I don’t listen/watch Alex Jones; from what little I have seen, he’s a jerk who’s just the opposing version of Rachael Maddow.
What looks glaringly obvious is that an Obama judge gave Rachael Maddow a pass when she defamed not a special public person, but a competing network by lying that it was proven that they were a propaganda arm of Putin’s Russia. She made this claims in very specific claims – she’s a Rhodes Scholar so she has some grasp of use of the English language.
HOWEVER… the Obama judge ruled that Maddow got a pass on that specific and detailed defamation because her viewers were all smart people that knew part of the way she made her living was by performing as a pathological liar regarding other people and organizations that her viewers also hated. Therefore, as they knew she was lying when she made those accusations, then she wasn’t guilty of defamation.
Another Obama judge held that while Maddow’s listeners/viewers know she’s a pathological serial liar, Alex Jones listeners/viewers accept as the gospel truth every word that comes out of Jones’ mouth. What I heard him say about that mass murder leaves me thinking he’s just a pile of human junk – like Rachael Maddow. That has nothing to do that Alex Jones got the usual “two completely opposite standards of justice”.
Similarly, Fox tried the Maddow acquittal as their defense as it was their GUESTS who defamed Dominion, not their commentators. Different rules for them – judge held that unlike Maddow’s viewers, Fox viewers just like Alex Jones believe every single word uttered on Fox must be true.
This Country was founded in the belief that God exists. McCarthy did not attack the “Left” ( a meaningless term) he defended against an attack by atheism as expressed by Communism. The inherent Freedom in our Constitution is explicitly denied by Atheism replaced by the “autonomous individual “ who denies all right and wrong except his own individual opinion and any action’s taken are justified by himself.
McCarthy had NOTHING to do with God, and his “hearings” were as far from “God” as anything could ever be.
Chris – you’re blathering.
First: there does not appear to be any way for you to actually know the truth of what you said, unless God has actually told the information to you, which I doubt
Second, nothing you said even contradicts anything John said in the comment you were responding to. You should learn to think logically.
Of course there’s a way to know. The scriptures show us the nature of God and what he does and does not, and the McCarthy hearings were based on “FEAR” , “MALICE” and “LIES” and resulted in the ruin of many lives and families and careers and ended in confusion.
The Scriptures tell us;
1.God is not the author of lies. The enemy is.
2. Fear does not come from God is comes from the enemy.
3. God is not the author of confusion.
So yes, God did tell me that He had NOTHING to do with the McCarthy hearings, other than bringing them to an end finally by inspiring one man to speak up and inspiring people to hear the message when he did.
If you read the scriptures, then you’ll know evil when you see it.
And your sad little comment trying to bait me by insulting me, did not come from God either.
Haha, you’re a piece of work. Your dismissal of the McCarthy hearings is pure opinion, and you present it as God’s truth. Tell me: when you boldly declare: “God is of such-and-such opinion about the McCarthy hearings,” is there no little alarm bell that goes off in your head that says: wait, maybe I shouldn’t be so arrogant and presumptuous to think I know everything God is thinking?
On the second point, I observed that, logically speaking, you failed to contradict John. There was exactly zero insulting about that. Yet, you use the coward’s way out of “I’m not going to dignify that with a response” because you know that you’re wrong.
1. When someone says you are “blathering” and “should learn to think logically” they are insulting you.
2. The irony of you, who have said nothing but an effective “nuh uh” should be telling anyone to think “logically” is laughable. I referenced scriptural FACTS about God.
So listen up troll, … God is NOT the father of lies, whether YOU choose to believe that or not.
The scriptures say you are WRONG.
God is also not the father of FEAR as we learn in 2nd Timothy, fear comes from the enemy.
So its YOU son, who need to learn to “think logically”, instead of responding with typical trolling insults and “nuh uh”.
3. The coward is you son. You’re a coward because you hide behind a made up name because you’re too ashamed of the crap that you write, ….to be man enough to put your own name on it.
THATS who you are son, and all your insults won’t change that one bit.
When you’re man enough to put your name behind your words, you let me know.
Until then you’re just a coward hiding behind a fake name and a keyboard, calling other people what you know you are yourself.
“son” “son” “son” . . . you’re really trying to talk down to me, to be demeaning, so I guess that is something God wants you to do, right? Since apparently you know the mind of God on all 20th Century issues even though the Scriptures (which I do believe in) were written long before those events occurred.
Logic: point out one way in which your original response to John contradicted anything he said? In terms of substance, that’s the only point I’ve ever made about your failure to think logically. Thus far, . . . crickets. Just “son . . . son . . . son . . . son.” That doesn’t cut it logically. Using condescending language toward someone is not the same as a logical statement or proof. It is a cop out and constitutes more evidence that you cannot answer my substantive point.
As for me not using my actual name on here: that is another deflection because you have no logical response to my point about your failure to use logic. You may notice that 95% of commenters here don’t use their actual name, and there are many valid reasons for someone to use a screen name. It’s done on all social media platforms. In addition, it has nothing to do with my substantive point, which, again, you have deflected from and failed to answer . . . because you know I’m right and you’re wrong.
No I call you “son” because I know you’re not some “old man from Kansas” by your infantile writing style, funny though to hear you whine about it after starting out by insulting and “talking down” to me.
As for your latest word salad, it still equals “nuh uh”, and nothing more.
No God did not tell me to call you “Son” in fact he probably told me not to but I don’t always do what I’m supposed to just like most people, and letting a momma’s boy troll hiding in his moms basement like you bait me into this inane tit-for-tat trolling you’re doing is probably one of the dumber things I’ve done in a while.
But its hot out, 100 degrees and I can’t work in the trees for the next few days still so I’m here and bored and more easily baited by trolls like you who just look to insult and harass and actually have zero to say.
My words still stand. I produced scriptural fact about God that confirms the McCarthy hearings were evil, and if you can’t see that that means you are deceived by evil and possibly evil yourself, although you may not be evil yourself, you may just be a willing dupe.
Either way you’re laughable, and there’s one simple truth a little boy like you is never going to be able to run from.
You hide behind an anonymous handle like a coward, because you’re too ashamed of the garbage you write to put your own name behind your words.
Again you deflect instead of answer my substantive point, but what else did I expect? As I said, you know I’m right, which is precisely why you haven’t answered me substantively. It has nothing to do with all the irrelevant stuff you’ve thrown in the air as a distraction.
But open your ears, man. You are hyper-sensitive! I said, “You should learn to think logically.” You would think I just stole your life savings by the extreme way you reacted to that, and are still reacting.
But let me ask you a few questions:
(a) How do I even know your name is Chris Weber? For all anyone knows, you could be using a fake name just like I use a screen name.
(b) You answer plenty of people who don’t use their full name, but just a first name, which (just like your screen name) is easy enough to invent. Why do you single me out to attack for using a screen name (just like 95% of the other commenters on here) but you have no problem with them?
(c) What difference does it make? I use a recognizable name that people I’ve conversed with for years on this comment section know me by. There are many other commenters with screen names, and we all are fine with having a conversation on that basis. You are the only person who has ever complained about not using one’s real name. Why is it such a big deal?
(d) In any event I have a name that’s probably shared by thousands of people in the US. What difference would it make if you knew my first and last name? It wouldn’t add anything to your knowledge about me, and more importantly, it would be completely irrelevant to the content of the discussion.
(e) Perhaps I should have anticipated that there was a change you would take my (accurate) description of what you said as an insult, but how could I have known just how sensitive you were? I mean cut me a little slack, man. Your gross over-reaction smacks of someone who is just trying to deflect from the sustentive point. You’re not fooling anyone.
I will await your answers to my questions.
(a) “How do I even know your name is Chris Weber?”
Because unlike you my profile is an actual linked profile, and it links directly to my social media pages and my professional website along with links to my YouTube channel and includes photos of me and my work along with my email and mailing address and phone number which is on my professional page.
That’s how troll.
“(b) You answer plenty of people who don’t use their full name, but just a first name, which (just like your screen name) is easy enough to invent. Why do you single me out to attack for using a screen name (just like 95% of the other commenters on here)”
Because they’re not trolling me like you, or calling me a coward and continuing to badger me with their lame attempts to make themselves feel better for being called out on hiding behind an anonymous handle while calling other people cowards.
That’s why.
“(c) What difference does it make? I use a recognizable name that people I’ve conversed with for years on this comment section know me by. ”
Using a “recognizable troll handle” means nothing. Its not your name.
When I comment I comment as myself, and put my name behind my own words.
When you comment, you hide behind a wall of anonymity.
You speak from behind a mask, so ashamed of your own words that you’re afraid to even put your own name on them.
That’s the difference.
Clear it up any, …troll?
And as far your heckling insults trying to paint me as “sensitive” when you’re the one writing discourses trying to deflect from your own moral ambiguity and demonstrated insecurity … which causes you to hide your own name and identity from your own words because you’re afraid of anyone knowing you ever wrote them, .. and doing it on my comment while endlessly trolling me, …well … guess it’s just one more of the cute and loveable things that you do.
I tried clicking on your name and avatar but they were unclickable. So I’m not sure what you mean when you refer to a linked profile. I tried that before I typed in the question. What else should I be doing to see your linked profile?
P.S. So from your answer it sounds like you’re fine and dandy with people using a made-up screen name as long as their comments don’t offend you, but if someone offends you then their use of a made-up screen name makes them a troll. Is that an accurate interpretation of what you said.
P.P.S. You still have not contradicted my substantive point but I don’t expect you to. On what basis should I not conclude that you have no answer? Hint: calling me names is not a valid response.
That’s just not correct, they are clickable, you just didn’t bother to click.
https://gravatar.com/chris0753?utm_source=hovercard
As for the substantive question, let me know when you ask one.
And as for your pathetic trolling trying to define my words with your weaselly “sounds like you’re find and dandy with…. ” crap, ….stow it son.
I don’t let or respond to weaselly troll taunts trying to get me to defend words I never spoke.
First, thank you for providing the link, I appreciate that. Second, I did try to click. I was at a computer with a mouse and I tried multiple times in various places on the screen. And even now on my phone I can’t tap anywhere and have it send me to your profile. So I maintain that there is no link, or if there is one it’s defective.
Finally, since you asked, I will repeat the substantive point. To review, John said that the McCarthy hearings were aimed at defending against an atheistic godless system (international communism), you responded vehemently that no, the hearings were not approved by God, and I pointed out that your point, even if we assume for argument’s sake that it is true, does not contradict anything John said. You took great offense to my comment but you did not explain how I was wrong. What I’m waiting for is some explanation from you how your assertion logically contradicted anything John said. To date you have not supplied any such explanation, opting instead to call me names over and over again.
No I took offense to your trolling insulting me that I was blathering and needed to learn to think logically.
Had you not opened your mouth in that way, and addressed me with some respect initially, then I’d responded accordingly.
But you didn’t. You started out by insulting me out of the gate, and have been in here whining about it and backpedaling trying to pretend you didn’t, ever since while also pretending to be some “old man from kansas” which you clearly aren’t.
I was born under Eisenhower. You definitely did not come from that generation, there’s a million “tells” in your anachronistic writing. You definitely did not come from the 50s and you definitely aren’t from the 60s, so “old man from Kansas” you aren’t.
What you are I don’t know, …that’s the thing about anonymity. No one knows who they’re talking to. So no one treats anyone with respect.
I treat people with the same level of respect they treat me with and that’s exactly what you got.
And you’ve been in here blubbering about it ever since.
You want a “break”? Then give me one.
Stop trolling my comment and stop pretending you didn’t come in running your mouth insulting me out of the gate. And quit playing the victim.
You want respect then treat others with respect.
You’ll find you get back exactly what you put out in life.
You said to let you know when I asked a substantive question. I let you know and you ignored it, again opting for personal invective over substance. I now see it is hopeless because the personal attack is all you are about. So if we are limited to a discussion of personal characteristics, here’s what I know: you know nothing about me. Everything you said that you think you know is wrong. I was born during the Eisenhower administration and grew up in the 1960s and 1970s.
You suggest that the anonymity of screen names prevents people from knowing another person’s actual age, but that’s absurd. Unless someone posts their birth certificate or drivers license, how can anyone really know? And even then it would be impossible to tell that the person typing is the same as the person on the birth certificate or driver’s license.
You refer to “tells” about my age but you don’t cite a single example. Furthermore I’m not blubbering or whining. Rather, I’m pointing out that your repeated ad hominems are a transparent attempt to avoid answering me on substance. I see that any attempt at discussion with you is futile. You are unable to answer me on substance because you know I’m right. Have a good evening.
I told you quit playing the victim, quit blubbering over what you yourself started and stop trolling me.
I’m not even gonna read your latest keyboard diatribe. Its nothing more than diversion refusing to accept the fact you started out insulting someone, and when they returned back to you the exact same level of respect that you showed them you cried like a baby just like you’re doing now, playing the victim and trying to paint me as the bad guy.
Well I’m not.
You’re on my comment boy, not the other way around.
You “singled me out” not the other way around.
And YOU opened your big mouth with the insults to me first, not the other way around.
So all your blather doesn’t’ change the fact that you’re the one who started it, and you’re the one so ashamed of the crap you spew out in here daily that you’re afraid to put your own name on it.
So stow it.
Next time, … if you don’t like it, then don’t come looking for it.
I’m not crying or complaining. You won’t even read my response because YOU ARE A COWARD. You are also a pompous ass and are unable to discuss substance once your poor wittle feewings are hurt. So GFY
The guy is a narcissistic kook, read some his responses to me on the electoral college. Son😂
Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs, the State Department, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt were communist.
Roosevelt’s idiotic communism “fundamentally transformed” a customary and traditional market downturn into an historical depression.
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
Communism must have been struck down from its inception in 1860, starting with Lincoln’s wholly unconstitutional denial of not-prohibited and fully constitutional secession.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“In for a penny, in for a pound.”
– Sir Thomas Malory, 1485
______________________________
America must be repealed back to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Naturalization Act of its Founders – the nation, the law, the people.
I surprised myself with the reaction I had when Biden announced that the FBI and Secret Service and an “independent” would investigate the attempted assassination of President Trump. Instantly I thought the fix is in. It was not a thought-out reaction. It was instant. For me, this is a 180 degree change. My uncle who, in part, raised me, was a career police officer; my brother-in-law was an FBI agent; for a brief time, I wore a badge and for years ran a state’s white collar crime unit. My heart always has been with law enforcement– and it still is– but I have lost the instinctive trust I once had in these formerly great agencies. As I thought about my uncharacteristic reaction, I realized the numerous times in the past eight years these institutions have been used by Democrats to attack conservatives, and in particular President Trump. Of course, those who have corrupted the FBI and Secret Service could not have done so if we had an informed electorate. Joe Biden would not have been allowed to get away with giving an Oval Office speech as if he was pure as the driven snow when the week before he had all but called for the killing of President Trump. But all of this is possible because main stream media and the government help insure that opposing voices (i.e. conservative voices) are muted as “disinformation.” I hope others do not have the same instinctive reaction I now have. If too many do, it may take generations, if ever, to restore the trust.
I grew up watching the Efrem Zimbalist, Jr., FBI show, but now, I have zero respect for them.
Yeah, I grew up watching that show, too. Frankly, I think that even at the time, there was a large dose of propaganda administered in the process, but there is no question that the agency has become far worse.
And P.T. 109 (i.e. the movie and song) was to be celebrated, not prosecuted under the UCMJ as gross incompetence, dereliction, and negligence by the boat commander, one John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
– William Casey, CIA Director
_________________________________
Allen Dulles, the catalyst of the JFK assassination, was appointed to the Warren Commission.
The guy who killed Kennedy investigated the killing of Kennedy.
The guy who killed Kennedy investigated the killing of Kennedy.
When you can provide actual proof of that rather than Insinuations Kennedy Assassination Conspiracy v37.4.02 you are going to be rewarded by becoming a billionaire
“During the Red Scare and the McCarthy period, it was the left that was targeted with blacklisting, censorship and arrests. It is now the left that has constructed a global censorship system that exceeds anything that Joe McCarthy even dreamt of”
I agree 100 percent with the sentiment of this article but this statement is a glaring example of how partisan blinders impact our discourse and allow us to seed false-hoods by subtle implications and omissions.
YES, Professor Turley, it was during the Red Scare when Democrats in congress pressured by McCarthy collaborated in the witch hunt.
But the way you word the sentence, then conflate Joe McCarthy with the democrats you make it sound like old Tailgunner Joe was a democrat.
He was not. The McCarthy hearings were held by a REPUBLICAN, not a democrat.
In writing it this way you join the ranks of the MSM spreading false information by implying it was a democratic effort and not a republican one that started the entire Red Scare.
The truth?
It was a JOINT EFFORT. BOTH PARTIES WERE INVOLVED. It was finally a lawyer who said to McCarthy “have you no decency sir” bringing some sanity back to the Capital.
So while I wholeheartedly support and concur with the subject of your article and the sentiment of it, the way you write it to make it look like only democrats censor and worse, that democrats were responsible for the McCarthy hearings is the same thing the partisan media does.
You can’t play this censorship thing as if its only the democrats who are interested in it. Its the GOVERNMENT that wants to censor us, regardless of whether there’s a D or an R after their name.
When republicans get back in in November, my question is will you be just as intrepid in calling out their efforts to censor liberal speech, as you are now when the liberals are censoring conservative speech?
I ask the question but you never read your own blog comments (since its mostly a bunch of anonymous trolls yapping endlessly) so I don’t expect you’ll ever answer it.
But you should. The way you wrote that may have been a subconscious inference, but you made it sound like democrats were responsible for the McCarthy hearings AND that Tailgunner joe was a Democrat.
Both are lies. He was Republican.
Actually in just reading my own comment, I realize I was reading with my independent blinders. This comment is completely wrong. I misread exactly what you wrote , I apologize. You were not indicating democrats were doing the targeting, you were saying they were targeted pointing out that republicans ALSO censor in your usual non-partisan manner.
I misread your quote and should have known you’d not be so partisan. After all you never were before which is why I read your blog so I should have known that. I just read it quickly over my coffee and started writing thinking you too had gone the way of the partisan hacks.
In doing so I was the hack, lol. Apologies.
In the words of Miss Emily Loutella, …..”Never mind….”
The fat lady has started to sing.
Why?
It didn’t make any sense to me, either.
How many using screen names here
are on someone’s payroll to be
spreading disinformation?
Jonathan: the issue today must be that yet another MAGA judge has stepped forward to protect Trump and his wide ranging criminality by attacking Special Counsel Jack Smith. Judge Eileen Cannon was inspired a few weeks ago by the MAGA controlled SCOTUS providing Trump with cover. This is the state of justice in America today, when MAGA judges are emboldened to dismiss highly accomplished prosecutors like Jack Smith who are at the peak of their careers. President Obama recognized Smith’s competence and ethics in selecting him to work in the ethics branch of his DoJ under his equally brilliant legal mind, Attorney General Eric Holder. There he successfully prosecuted corrupt politicians and corrupt political groups. Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of ethics prosecutions Smith did were targeting corrupt Republicans.
MAGA Republicans are celebrating this political decision to reject Jack Smith as a Special Counsel, pointing out that SCOTUS in a unanimous decision threw out his ethics prosecution and conviction of a little known Republican governor and his wife. That is all MAGA has – just one reversal of a conviction. Simply put, no DoJ prosecutor has a perfect record and they all lose some decisions whether they are doing ethics prosecutions in a Democrat DoJ or a Republican. Already convicted felon Trump has blown his dog whistle to focus MAGA hatred towards Jack Smith not only because he is now successfully prosecuting Trump, but due to his record of convicting corrupt Republicans and Republican groups. They have been in panic ever since Smith started exposing the criminality of Trump and his fellow criminals who do his bidding.
Jonathan, America cannot survive another four years of Trump and dictatorial MAGA directives that include loading American courts with deeply flawed and political activists like Judge Cannon. If you question why Democrats who love America and equal justice for all are so alarmed that they are discussing whether the number of justices on SCOTUS needs to be increased to prevent SCOTUS continuing to rubber stamp the corrupt change from American justice for all to a MAGA system of special justice for Republicans, this is why.
The opinion is well-written and persuasive. It could have gone further and also concluded that Smith is a principal officer required to be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. But though Cannon found the arguments for that compelling she left it open, deciding instead that no law authorised the appointment by the AG even if Smith were merely an inferior officer. Stop the name calling and explain where the opinion is wrong.
Dennis – you say: “dictatorial MAGA directives that include loading American courts with deeply flawed and political activists like Judge Cannon.” What you are saying is that if a Republican President appoints REPUBLICANS to court seats, that is “dictatorial”. Thank you for proving the idiocy of the Left.
Jonathan: Immediately after the apparent assassination attempt on DJT’s life Pres. Biden and all Democrats condemned the act. Biden called for toning down all the violent rhetoric. Even MAGA Speaker Mike Johnson endorsed Biden’s call.
But one MAGA Republican wasn’t all in. MTG, now a principal spokesperson for the Republican Party, didn’t get the message from Johnson. She posted this:
“We are in a battle between GOOD and EVIL…The Democrats are the party pf pedophiles, murdering the innocent unborn, violence, and bloody, meaningless endless wars…the Democratic party is flat out evil, and yesterday they tried to murder President Trump”.
MTG is now the conspiracy theory-in-chief for the Republican Party. In another post she said: “I have so many questions about how this 20 year old was able to nearly pull off assassinating Pres. Trump by himself…Fine call me a conspiracy theorist. I don’t give damn…The insane left have been fantasizing out loud about killing Trump for years. Prove me wrong”.
It’s really not difficult to prove MTG is wrong. No one in the Democratic Party or the “left” has called “out loud” for the killing of Trump. They are not in the assassination business. No matter. I expect we will hear more from the MAGA right–bizarrely claiming Biden, his FBI and the SS were really behind the attempted assassination of DJT. Just prove ME wrong!
Dennis McIntyre, Biden’s equally incompetent lying version of Baghdad Bob, attempted this massive deflection:
“MTG is now the conspiracy theory-in-chief for the Republican Party.
Remember when Baghdad Bob McIntyre was wringing his hands over the conspiracy theory-in-chief for the Soviet Democrats? The conspiracy theory launched by Bolshevik Barack and Bribery Biden that they named the “Russia Dossier”. The one where a clown parade of police state fascist Soviet Democrats went before the media to say they had physical, verified proof that Trump was a Russian stooge.
Would that be Commissar Nancy Pelosi or her selected hatchet man, Congressman Adam Schiff?
The “don’t believe your lying eyes” tactics of Baghdad Bob McIntyre, where we aren’t supposed to remember the YEARS of vitriolic hyperbole and lies, claiming to be stating facts when they say that Trump is a Nazi, a dictator, a racist, etc. We had four years of Trump is president… so telling that Baghdad Bob nor his boss The Big Guy can’t point to any evidence of any of that. THAT wasn’t offensive – but MTG’s comments are.
MTG’s rhetoric is not to my taste; you can point out that Soviet Democrat evil and corruption using different language less likely to turn off independents.
But Baghdad Bob McIntyre who find’s MTG’s comments objectionable LOVES the clown parade of Soviet Democrat politicians saying Trump is a fascist, he’s Hitler, he’s Putin’s stooge, etc. Homosexuals and journalists will be in Trump concentration camps and blacks will immediately be back in slavery. They’ve been doing that for almost EIGHT years. Baghdad Bob has NEVER had a problem with that. But MTG’s language has offended Baghdad Bob McIntyre beyond belief.
MTG didn’t say she wanted to punch bribery Biden in the face – but Biden repeatedly bragged he wanted to take Trump out back and beat him up… like he did with his chain and Cornpop… Hey Jack! Cornpop was a bad dude!
MTG isn’t the woman who said she wanted to punch the president in the face. That was the Soviet Democrats’ Speaker of the House, Commissar Pelosi, who said she wanted to punch President Trump n the face. That was before the recording where Commissar Pelosi told those who were around her that the J6 riot was her fault, for not accepting Trump’s offer days earlier to provide thousands of National Guard troops and not acting on Intelligence that Antifa communists intended to capitalize on the rally over a mile away.
No, Bribery Biden did not call for the killing of Trump… he just did the blood red floodlight soaked public address with uniformed combat troops lined up behind him in that backdrop, claiming that America would perish if Trump were allowed to become president again. Straight out of George Orwell’s “1984” and Two Minute Hate.
Bribery Biden, Commissar Pelosi, and SCOTUS threatening Chuck Schumer have just spent years claiming Trump is a threat to the country. First because they told Americans they had verified evidence Trump was a Russian stooge to present to FISA courts that would allow the FBI to investigate Trump’s treason.
When that failed, they then said Trump would start WWIII, that Trump must be removed for being mentally unsuitable to be president via the 25th Amendment
(BTW, where did those voices disappear to as America watches Dementia Joe share the nuclear codes with his primary advisor, The Family Cashier Formerly Known As The Crackhead Kid, the smartest man that The Big Guy has ever met? What a kick in the balls to both Bolshevik Barack and the equally corrupt Biden war hero, AG Beau Biden, heroically killed in combat over in Iraq. Anyone believe a state prosecutor elected state Attorney General didn’t notice millions of dollars flowing into the family coffers from adversarial nations?).
And then they turned to police state fascism prosecutions of Trump – waiting years until he officially announced he would run for president again.
Baghdad Bob McIntyre, you show yourself to be the Bribery Biden clown that you are with years of celebrating your police state fascist presidents like Bolshevik Barack and now Obama’s Third Term calling Trump Hitler, a dictator, etc.
Lie to the country for years on end that Trump who took power from your Soviet Democrats is a Nazi, a Russian spy, a dictator, and a terrifying existential threat to the country and this will be the last election ever in America.
Run that chorus of coordinated Soviet Democrat politicians’ voices for years… You’ll find a few people in America willing to answer that dog whistle by nobly attempting the patriotic task of eliminating the man that is that threat and by doing so be the dead hero who saved America.
Not in here they didn’t. They came in the night it happened, insulting Trump and his supporters.