Connect with us

Tech

Sen. Josh Hawley Presses Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on Censorship ‘Blacklist’ Revealed by Hackers

Hawley is sounding the alarm yet again about Big Tech oppression.

Published

on

Sen. Josh Hawley has some questions for Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey after a huge security breach was caused by hackers attacking his social media platform.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Hawley is particularly concerned with the “blacklist” that is being kept by Twitter. The social media giant has frequently denied that they are choking conservative voices off of their platform, even as conservatives are deplatformed, shadowbanned, and otherwise discriminated against by the Silicon Valley monolith.

“One such screenshot indicates that Twitter employs tools allowing it to append “Search Blacklist,” “Trends Blacklist,” “Bounced,” and “ReadOnly” flags to user accounts. Given your insistence in testimony to Congress that Twitter does not engage in politically biased “shadowbanning” and the public interest in Twitter’s moderation practices, it is notable that Twitter reportedly suspended user accounts sharing screenshots of this panel,” Hawley wrote in his letter.

He is demanding that Dorsey and Twitter executives “define the terms “Search Blacklist,” “Trends Blacklist,” “Bounced,” and “ReadOnly.” Please also explain, for each term, whether such flags on user accounts affect the visibility of tweets within users’ timelines.”

“Please explain the rules that Twitter uses to implement such flags on user accounts and tweets and the process by which Twitter ensures that such implementation is not conducted in a politically biased manner. As you no doubt recall, you have testified to Congress that “We believe strongly in being impartial, and we strive to enforce our rules impartially. We do not shadowban anyone based on political ideology.” This statement indicates that your use of these internal systems is governed by “rules” rather than mere discretion,” Hawley added.

Big League Politics has reported on Hawley’s efforts to break up the Big Tech monopoly by amending the problematic Section 230 of the Communcations Decency Act:

CNS News reported that Missouri Senator Josh Hawley sent Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey a letter on May 27, 2020 taking the company to task for “fact-checking” President Trump’s about mail-in ballots.

In a number of Tweets he made on May 27, Dorsey sustained that Trump’s comments regarding mail-ballots being filled with fraud “may mislead people into thinking they don’t need to register to get a ballot (only registered voters receive ballots),” Dorsey Tweeted. We’re updating the link on @realDonaldTrump’s tweet to make this more clear,” Dorsey continued.

Hawley noted that on Tuesday, “for the first time ever, Twitter branded the President’s tweets with a ‘fact check’ designed to encourage readers to believe that the President’s political speech was inaccurate.”

Hawley commented, “Twitter’s decision to editorialize regarding the content of political speech raises questions about why Twitter should continue receiving special status and special immunity from publisher liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.”

According to Section 230, companies that distribute user content are not treated as a publisher, like outlets such as New York Times or the Washington Post.

Hawley also called attention to the fact that Twitter failed to respond to the “outright lies and propaganda by the Chinese Communist Party,” which used social media to scapegoat American soldiers for starting the Wuhan virus pandemic.

Hawley is wanting Twitter to explain why companies which behave like publishers — namely editing President Trump’s tweets in the aforementioned case — should not receive publisher treatments.

Twitter has been embarrassed with their hacking scandal, and this could be an opportunity to finally hold the company accountable for their disreputable business practices.

Tech

ORWELLIAN: Twitter Censors Big League Politics Article About Joe Biden Attacking 17-Year-Old Kyle Rittenhouse

Big Tech does not want the truth to get out.

Published

on

Twitter has censored a Big League Politics article detailing a statement made by the Joe Biden campaign attacking 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse, who shot two communists dead and shot another in the bicep in Kenosha, Wisc. and faces murder charges as a result.

The monolithic social media platform informed the BLP Twitter account on Wednesday that they are censoring a nearly 3-week-old article titled, “Joe Biden Smears American Hero Kyle Rittenhouse,” claiming that it glorifies violence.

The notice can be seen here:

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Twitter is not the only platform to censor BLP articles in an attempt to suppress the truth from the masses. Facebook also has BLP in their cross hairs, using a truth commission of fake news hacks to serve as their so-called fact checkers.

Facebook once tried to censor content published by BLP to expose the bizarre and unexplained circumstances surrounding the mysterious death of pedophile Jeffrey Epstein in a Manhattan jail cell:

Facebook’s new ministry of truth, led by disreputable fact checking operations like Lead Stories, has been initiated to stifle independent voices on the social media giant, but they have been caught and forced to backtrack after trying to suppress news about camera malfunctions near Jeffrey Epstein’s cell during his mysterious death at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City last month.

“There were no media reports that a camera monitoring Epstein’s cell area malfunctioned in the hours before the accused sex traffickers death on Saturday August 10, 2019,” claimed Duke, the 26-year veteran of CNN who co-founded Lead Stories, in a blatant deception within the bogus fact check of the story that initially broke on Big League Politics.

Duke’s analysis was false because Big League Politics referenced a media report by digital media specialist Michael Coudrey that he initially refused to acknowledge in his phony fact check.

The phony fact checkers also targeted another BLP article to suppress the truth about Democrat tyrants in Virginia usurping unlawful authority against the 1st Amendment of the Constitution:

Last week, Big League Politics reported on a bill introduced in the Virginia legislature that would effectively criminalize dissent against government officials.

Virginia House Bill 1627 was introduced by Democrat Delegate Jeffrey M. Bourne to protect government officials from so-called harassment caused by “indecent language” transmitted over a “computer or computer network.”

The full language reads as follows: “If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.”

The legislation applies the above provision directly to “the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”

Because of the intentionally nebulous and vague nature of the terminology in the legislation, the legislation constitutes a blanket ban of criticism on public officials. A judge, likely appointed by the government officials in question, would determine what constitutes harassment as well as what constitutes “obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language.”

In short, the egregiously unconstitutional bill would make free speech dependent on rulings by biased government appointees, and cause a chilling effect on those who wish to speak out against public officials. This is the type of intolerable act that the Founding Fathers waged a revolutionary war to put to an end.

The Orwellian truth commission set up by Facebook found fault with the report and took measures to prevent it from being disseminated widely on the platform. They had their hired goons at Politifact flag the story as fake news in order to restrict the story from being shared and prevent social media users from knowing the truth about what is happening in Virginia.

Politifact claims that the legislation “spells out criminal penalties for harassment of or threats made to certain state officials. It does not affect ordinary free speech.” This is an assessment that is at best embarrassingly naive, but more likely the cognizant disinformation from a guilty and complicit agent of Big Brother.

The Orwellian push by Silicon Valley corporations is intensifying before the election. They must lose their Section 230 subsidies under the federal government for their heinous and anti-American business practices against free speech.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending