Posted on 07/05/2023 1:12:37 PM PDT by libstripper
Former White House press secretary and current MSNBC host Jen Psaki was named several times by a federal judge who is temporarily preventing White House officials from meeting with tech companies about social media censorship.
The injunction said that Psaki "publicly began pushing Facebook and other social-media platforms to censor COVID-19 misinformation" on May 5, 2021.
"At a White House Press Conference, Psaki publicly reminded Facebook and other social-media platforms of the threat of ‘legal consequences’ if they do not censor misinformation more aggressively," it continued.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
The injunction also states that the government's actions "likely violate the Free Speech Clause" and that the court "is not persuaded by Defendants’ arguments."
"If the allegations made by Plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history," the injunction said. "In their attempts to suppress alleged disinformation, the Federal Government, and particularly the Defendants named here, are alleged to have blatantly ignored the First Amendment’s right to free speech."
It's even worse than that; it's probably a felonious conspiracy to deprive conservatives throughout the country of their most fundamental free-speech rights, please see:
18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; * * * They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
We have all of the named defendants in the case probably involved in this felonious conspiracy, a conspiracy that would definitely count as a "high crime and misdemeanor." That nails Pedo Joe for an impeachable offense. When Congress prepares articles of impeachment directed at him it must include this particularly horrible felony.
What about the direct employed assets and contractors inside those social media and tech companies? Thousands of them.
Ex-Biden aide Jen Psaki hit for coercing tech companies to censor conservatives by federal judge
The injunction says that Psaki began pushing social-media platforms to ‘censor COVID-19 misinformation’ in May 2021
Judge’s ruling could be ‘most consequential’ opinion on the 21st century: Clay Travis
OutKick founder Clay Travis reacts to a federal judge’s ruling over the White House’s communication with Big Tech on ‘Fox & Friends.’
Former White House press secretary and current MSNBC host Jen Psaki was named several times by a federal judge who is temporarily preventing White House officials from meeting with tech companies about social media censorship.
The injunction said that Psaki “publicly began pushing Facebook and other social-media platforms to censor COVID-19 misinformation” on May 5, 2021.
“At a White House Press Conference, Psaki publicly reminded Facebook and other social-media platforms of the threat of ‘legal consequences’ if they do not censor misinformation more aggressively,” it continued.
The injunction by Louisiana Judge Terry A. Doughty was in response to recent lawsuits from Louisiana and Missouri attorneys general. The suits allege that the White House coerced or “significantly encourage[d]” tech companies to suppress free speech during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Published July 5, 2023 10:37am EDT
Why do my conspiracy nightmares keep coming true? It’s getting so I’m afraid to go to sleep for fear I’ll have another one concerning nuclear weapons.
Why wasn’t this done back in 2021 when this was being done? A !little late on the call aren’t they.
1. Plaintiffs consist of the State of Missouri, the State of Louisiana, Dr. Aaron Kheriaty (“Kheriaty”), Dr. Martin Kulldorff (“Kulldorff”), Jim Hoft (“Hoft”), Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya (“Bhattacharya”), and Jill Hines (“Hines”).:
2. Defendants consist of President Joseph R Biden (“President Biden”), Jr, Karine Jean-Pierre (“Jean-Pierre”), Vivek
H Murthy (“Murthy”), Xavier Becerra (“Becerra”), Dept of Health & Human Services (“HHS”), Dr. Hugh
Auchincloss (“Auchincloss”), National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases (“NIAID”), Centers for Disease
Control & Prevention (“CDC”), Alejandro Mayorkas (“Mayorkas”), Dept of Homeland Security (“DHS”), Jen
Easterly (“Easterly”), Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (“CISA”), Carol Crawford (“Crawford”),
United States Census Bureau (“Census Bureau”), U. S. Dept of Commerce (“Commerce”), Robert Silvers (“Silvers”),
Samantha Vinograd (“Vinograd”), Ali Zaidi (“Zaidi”), Rob Flaherty (“Flaherty”), Dori Salcido (“Salcido”), Stuart F.
Delery (“Delery”), Aisha Shah (“Shah”), Sarah Beran (“Beran”), Mina Hsiang (“Hsiang”), U. S. Dept of Justice
(“DOJ”), Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), Laura Dehmlow (“Dehmlow”), Elvis M. Chan (“Chan”), Jay
Dempsey (“Dempsey”), Kate Galatas (“Galatas”), Katharine Dealy (“Dealy”), Yolanda Byrd (“Byrd”), Christy Choi
(“Choi”), Ashley Morse (“Morse”), Joshua Peck (“Peck”), Kym Wyman (“Wyman”), Lauren Protentis (“Protentis”),
Geoffrey Hale (“Hale”), Allison Snell (“Snell”), Brian Scully (“Scully”), Jennifer Shopkorn (“Shopkorn”), U. S. Food
& Drug Administration (“FDA”), Erica Jefferson (“Jefferson”), Michael Murray (“Murray”), Brad Kimberly
, U. S. Dept of State (“State”), Leah Bray (“Bray”), Alexis Frisbie (“Frisbie”), Daniel Kimmage
(“Kimmage”), U. S. Dept of Treasury (“Treasury”), Wally Adeyemo (“Adeyemo”), U. S. Election Assistance
Commission (“EAC”), Steven Frid (“Frid”), and Kristen Muthig (“Muthig”).
3
[Doc. No. 252]
4
[Doc. No. 256]
5
[Doc. No. 262]
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520.293.0.pdf
You notice how the skank Psaki used the word “misinformation” instead of “disinformation”.
There is a fine legal distinction between the two words. If you claim someone is using disinformation then you have to prove it is disinformation. Not so when using the word misinformation.
The progressive’s in the Puppet Biden regime, know full well that the COVID “misinformation” was actually coming from the federal government. /spit
Corrupt politicians wanted to be "players" in this mess. The excesses and sleezy attack on our public news on the part of government to further its propagandists activities happens because of legislative permissions.
Look at the Church Committee hearings in the 70's and you'll see today on full display.
And considering many of them worked for the DOJ, the FBI, the NSA or the CIA, “assets or contractors” is probably exactly the right language to use.
“Hit” like a red-headed stepchild?
🤣😀😜
Another poorly written headline.
Defendants should all be tied to posts and be given the old Ceausescu Send-off.
So is the judges order essentially a hiring freeze at tech companies and social media companies of federal government employees / agents? .......or is it a termination notice for the thousands already in place?
Neither. I don’t think the judge said anything at all about those quasi-governmental employees.
So what are the consequences for a federal government puke or management pukes of a website that blocks a citizen’s free speech? I’m old and I’ve never seen or heard of anyone going to jail for such acts against someone’s Constitutional rights.
So exactly what are all those government content influencers supposed to be doing? If they do what they do, that’s in violation of judges order. So they should all be kicked to the curb tonite.
Use Turner to get her seething, then Jim Jordan to put her over the top, and after her outburst, punch down:
"Maam, the Free Speech Clause protected everything you just testified to, protected your appearance before this Committee, protected your inalienable right to leave this room and make the rounds of fawning press, protected your right to go on MSNBC tonight and make an even greater fool of yourself.What the Free Speech Clause does not do is permit you to sit in a room with media companies and demand censorship of speech you simply do not like.
Advice is cheap so I'll just say this: the next time you appear before this Committee, you're leaving in handcuffs."
There are tens of thousands of them. Going rate was $400 per day to steer content.
The link to the Memorandum is posted earlier in this thread. Here is the link to the Injunction. It is all delightful reading!
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/294/missouri-v-biden/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.