Censorship By the Left

Suppressing Information that Challenges the Narrative

As Judge Jeanine Pirro so accurately expressed, the Democrats, far-left progressives, and socialists are in favor of “Overturning presidential elections, nationalizing private industries like healthcare and education, destroying America’s borders, erasing its national identity, and effectively silencing conservative voices in the cybersphere and public square.” In addition to actions such as kneeling during the national anthem and and support for riots, they are pushing a pandemic response narrative that keeps the entire population locked down and muzzled. They are laying the groundwork for an election destined to end in litigation.

They are pushing for censorship which violates the First Amendment of the Constitution. According to Jonathan Turley, as published in The Hill, “Hillary Clinton has demanded that political speech be regulated to avoid the ‘manipulation of information.’” If the Left had their way, not only would the Right no longer be heard, but Republicans and Conservatives could be branded racists, terrorists, or subversives, turning the US into an effective one-party state.

The Guardian reported, “Democracy is in peril …ahead of this year’s US election. The Trump administration and its supporters are waging an aggressive campaign to discredit and suppress mail-in voting – a crucial method in the midst of a pandemic.” This is a loaded statement which violates journalistic neutrality. It presupposes that (1) there is a dangerous pandemic, (2) the only way to address the pandemic is mail-in-ballots, and (3) mail-in ballots are not fraught with legitimate problems.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released guidelines for voting safely in-person. Since the beginning of the pandemic, at least twelve democratic countries around the world have held in-person elections, including Mongolia, without negative repercussions. This clearly demonstrates that mail-in ballots are not the only option. If Mongolia can hold in-person elections, so can the USA, the richest and most powerful nation on Earth.

According to Reuters, the “Biden campaign asks Twitter, Facebook to remove Trump posts bashing mail-in voting.” The Biden campaign claimed that Trump had made “false claims aimed at discrediting mail-in voting.” Why would a social media company respond to a request by one political party to silence the other? Who granted Twitter and Facebook the authority to evaluate whether or not President Trump’s claims were true? And finally, when was a precedent established that only “true” information could appear on social media? In the end, Twitter attached warning labels to the president’s tweet, which read “Get the facts about mail-in ballots.” The facts were, of course, the “facts” to which Twitter gave its stamp of approval.

Is Biden the ultimate embarrassment to our country?*

This poll gives you free access to your premium politics email newsletter. Subscribe at any time.

If truth is the standard for whether or not a voice has the right to be heard, the truth is there is significant proof that mail-in ballots are fraught with problems, which could alter the outcome of the election. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission reported that in the last four federal elections,  2.7 million mail-in ballots were misdelivered and 1.3 million were rejected. The mail-in ballots have the sender’s name and address on the envelope, violating the anonymity of the voting process, something achieved with in-person voting.

The ballots must be received in a timely fashion, organized, stored, and counted by hand, all while preserving their integrity. They must also be recorded manually. The reported error margin in previous elections have varied by state from as little as 1% to as much as 20%. US elections are won by such small margins that even a modest error margin could alter the outcome.

Pandemic Censorship

“Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and other social media companies are scrambling to take down and fact-check rampant misinformation about topics like Covid-19 and the 2020 election that spread on their platforms.” This is how the censorship is framed, but who gets to decide what is “misinformation”? Videos about the drug hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) were removed from social media as misinformation, although the drug has been widely used by doctors in the US, Europe and Asia, for the treatment of coronavirus and is reported to reduce mortality by as much as half. Had this treatment been widely supported at the beginning of the pandemic, there would have been no justification for lockdowns, masks, or school closures. The election could have gone forward as usual with fair, in-person voting.

“Trump post downplaying COVID-19 compared to flu is removed by Facebook and flagged by Twitter.” That CBS News report noted that the tweet had “’violated the Twitter Rules about spreading misleading and potentially harmful information related to COVID-19,’ and added a link to help users find more reliable information about the pandemic.” “More reliable information” is a very dangerous term as, in this case, “reliable” is defined as being consistent with a certain narrative supported by mainstream media. Trump claimed that 100,000 die of flu each year, but the real number, according to CDC is 12,000 to 60,000.

So, yes, his statement was inaccurate, but research shows that, for those under 65, covid mortality is on par with the common flu. The president’s point was: why is the world overreacting to covid when it poses nearly the same threat as flu to majority of the population? Even if we hold him to the letter of his statement, rather than the spirit of what he said, this would still not justify allowing Twitter and Facebook to determine the information to which Americans are allowed to have access.

YouTube removed a video of a White House coronavirus task force member Dr. Scott Atlas challenging the need for social distancing. In a subsequent interview, Dr. Atlas said “We need to have scientists who are able to question…when you cite the science and it disagrees with what those people’s impressions of the science are, you are not allowed to go on.”

The Scientific Method, which has always been applied to decisions about the treatment of diseases and pandemics in the past, consists of six steps: 1. Make an observation, 2. Ask a question, 3. Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation, 4. Make a prediction based on the hypothesis, 5. Test the prediction, and 6. Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions.

In step three, many scientists asked if masks, lockdowns, or HCQ were effective. In step five, all of the options, including masks, lockdowns, and HCQ should have been tested. Afterwards, all of the researchers should have shared their findings that would then be used in step six to determine which methods were effective and which should be part of a policy recommendation. Censorship has caused these very vital steps to be skipped as doctors, whose research, opinions, and findings violated the only “acceptable” information, were silenced.

Censorship: Reporting on Riots and BLM Violence

Mainstream media reported and showed the arrest that led to the death of George Floyd. But when a white woman, named Jessica Doty Whitaker was fatally shot by BLM protesters for saying, “All lives matter.”, the story was largely ignored by mainstream media. The story was covered by right-leaning Fox News and the New York Daily News, as well as various YouTube channels and small, local and niche media. When a black man shot and killed five-year-old Cannon Hinnant, some mainstream media covered the story, but not nearly as intensely as they did when the races of those involved were reversed.

Former First Lady Michelle Obama tweeted regarding the BLM riots, “Trump is ‘pinning [violence] on what’s been an overwhelmingly peaceful movement for racial solidarity; it’s true, research backs it up; only a tiny fraction of demonstrations have had any violence at all … What the president is doing is … racist.’” The mainstream media and democrat politicians have insisted that the riots have been “mostly peaceful” while shootings and random acts of violence have skyrocketed.

New York City has had over 1,000 shootings, so far this year. Philadelphia, with a fraction of the population, has had 1,300 and Chicago has had nearly 3,000 shootings. Democrat-led cities have seen a combined total of nearly 5,000 shootings. Since proof exists that what Michelle Obama said is untrue, shouldn’t her tweets be subjected to censorship and removed? Shouldn’t they be flagged with a link that says, “Click here for the real story of the violence.”?

The author of this article googled “BLM Antifa attacking restaurants CNN” and multiple stories about BLM harassing or attacking diners appeared from small media around the US, YouTube, and the Daily Mail UK. The largest media to run a story related this topic was the Washington Post. The Daily Mail UK had this headline “We’re shutting you down’: Violent BLM protesters attack stunned diners and smash up a restaurant in Rochester in shocking footage during protest over the death of Daniel Prude.” A YouTube channel had “Pittsburgh BLM Harass Elderly At Restaurant During Protest!” News 21 wrote, “Portland protesters assault driver of crashed truck downtown.” The mainstream media is restricting reporting on violence by BLM against law-abiding citizens because it conflicts with the victim-narrative they are supporting.

Censorship and Democrat Support of the Riots

Democrat lawmakers are continually making statements in support of the riots or denying there is any evidence violence at all. The New York Post reported Democrat “Rep. Jerry Nadler calls violence from Antifa in Portland a ‘myth’”. Nadler’s declaration that the violence was a myth came “on the same day that Seattle police release bodycam footage of Antifa violence.” A headline that the author found most shocking was from September 5, 2020. Shore News published, “NEW YORK BLM Attacking Random People, Shutting Down Restaurants, Climbing Into Homes in Rochester.” Not only was this violence largely ignored by mainstream media, but the story of a police officer who was injured by rioters was also overlooked by national media, apart from New York Post and Fox.

Censorship by the Left are commonly reported in the right media and niche media. Democrat controlled mainstream media, however, do not report on the censorship implemented by Democrat controlled mainstream media. One from the New York Post explained, “YouTube censored my talk on policing.” One from Real Clear Politics reported, “Heather Mac Donald: YouTube Censored Me For Disproving Narrative That Police Are Engaged In Racist Violence.” News Break reported, “Wikipedia Editors Censor Antifa Involvement in Riots, Past Violence.” On Bitchute, the following was reported: “YOUTUBE IS CENSORING ANY MENTION OF BLM VIOLENCE.”

In order to avoid being labelled an enemy of the Revolution and having his articles censored, this author is prepared to admit his past thought-crimes. Mail-in-voting is not fraught with problems and subject to fraud. Covid is the deadliest virus in history and masks and lockdowns are the only way to stop it. HCQ does not work, and anyone who promotes it is a quack. BLM riots are peaceful. “But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.” (George Orwell, 1984)


New Right Network depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now