The New York Times has added a correction to a June 25 article which claimed that all 17 US intelligence agencies agree that Russia was behind the attacks on the Democratic National Committee with the goal of getting Donald Trump elected.
The update to the article came on Thursday, four days after the article was published and shared widely. The correction asserts that while they had claimed all 17 intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia had orchestrated the hacks during the election, when in reality it was just four.
The full correction and admission that they had published fake news:
“A White House Memo article on Monday about President Trump’s deflections and denials about Russia referred incorrectly to the source of an intelligence assessment that said Russia orchestrated hacking attacks during last year’s presidential election. The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.”
Failed candidate Hillary Clinton had also echoed this false claim in May.
It was a rough day for the Times, as hundreds of staffers had also walked out of the offices in protest of impending layoffs of copy editors.
The Times has long claimed to be impartial and unbiased, while holding clear resentment for our president. The newspaper recently stood by their funding of a controversial version of Julius Caesar, in which an actor dressed as Trump is brutally assassinated by senators. While Delta and Bank of America pulled their funding, the newspaper proudly defended the publication.
“As an institution that believes in free speech for the arts as well as the media, we support the right of the Public Theater to stage the production as they chose,” the Times said in a statement.
In June, FBI Director James Comey confirmed during his testimony before senate that the newspaper had published fake news about the president while claiming to have information from an anonymous source regarding contact between members of the Trump campaign and Russian officials.
“In the main, it was not true,” Comey said of their report.
The failing @nytimes writes total fiction concerning me. They have gotten it wrong for two years, and now are making up stories & sources!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 6, 2017
Trump has previously accused the Gray Lady of writing “total fiction,” and they continue to prove him right week after week.
Does the Arizona Constitution Provide Means for Lawmakers to Crack Down on Big Tech Censorship?
Does the Arizona Constitution provide protections from Big Tech?
The Arizona Constitution provides stronger protections for freedom of speech than the First Amendment does, potentially providing legislative solutions to Big Tech censorship in the state at a moment where political censorship is more pervasive than ever.
Article 2 Section 6, Arizona Constitution states that “Every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right. “
This differs greatly from the federal constitution in that it doesn’t limit the powers of a legislature to restrict freedom of speech. The US Constitution identifies “Congress” as the body it’s restricting from making a law abridging the freedom of speech.
The speech rights established by the Arizona Constitution are thus expressed positively; recognizing a right belonging to the people, as opposed to negating an infringement of said right.
Quite obviously, the Arizona Constitution was written in an 1910, an era in which the internet would’ve been just as inconceivable as it was in 1789.
In a 2019 Arizona Supreme Court case, the state’s highest court recognized in a 4-3 judgement that the Arizona Constitution provided greater protections than the federal constitution. The case recognized that violations of the First Amendment would represent de facto violations of the
It’s not outside the realm of possibility that the Arizona Attorney General, or state legislature, could hold Big Tech oligarchs to account for violating the Article 2 Section 6 rights of Arizona citizens- especially in a context the major platforms are collectively adjudicated to be acting as a trust in order to suppress competition and silence lawful speech.
Three Arizona legislators called upon Attorney General Mark Brnovich to begin an antitrust investigation into Big Tech oligarchs following the coordinated deplatforming operation against Parler, in which both Amazon and Apple colluded to restrict the free speech platform from the internet.
In an era where the overwhelming majority of free speech is communicated online, the censorious actions of Big Tech very plausibly represent an assault of the right of free expression guaranteed in the Arizona Constitution. Both chambers of Arizona’s legislature remain Republican, even as the state has become purple, and action against Big Tech censorship on the state level could become a real possibility in the coming years.
States1 day ago
Grassroots Leaders Send Final Warning to GOP Establishment: Rejecting Trump Means Death of Republican Party
Politics3 days ago
GOP Establishment Threatens President Trump with Impeachment Unless He Denies Election Fraud
White House15 hours ago
President Trump Contemplates Ditching the GOP, Starting New ‘Patriot Party’ to Put America First
Big League National Security3 days ago
DNI Ratcliffe: China Interfered in 2020 Election, CIA Suppressed Info
Tech2 days ago
Free Speech Platform Gab Receives 3 Million New Users in 12 Days
Politics2 days ago
Constituents Already Beginning to Turn on Peter Meijer, Who Admits That Voting to Impeach Trump May Have Ruined His Political Career
Free Speech3 days ago
Tennessee High School Principal Suspended for Speaking Against Big Tech Censorship
Big League National Security3 days ago
Left-Wing Extremist Charged in Alleged Florida Capitol Attack Identified Soros as “Sponsor”