Big Government is taking a bizarrely defensive approach with regards to its Censorship Industrial Complex, which it claims has "nothing to do with censorship."
These were the exact words uttered by Nina Jankowicz, the former head of the federal government's Disinformation Governance Board, a division of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in an interview with MSNBC. According to Jankowicz, Big Tech and Big Government's collusive censorship operation "is not about removing speech."
"This is a weaponization of the court system," Jankowicz further complained in a separate interview with The Guardian, referring to the case of Missouri v. Biden. U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty of Louisiana issued an injunction this week forbidding the Biden regime from any further communication and collusion with social media platforms to suppress online content.
"It is an intentional and purposeful move to disrupt the work that needs to be done ahead of the 2024 election, and it's really chilling."
(Related: Did you know that Big Academia is also involved in the state-led effort to silence free speech online?)
The government has no business interfering with online free speech, judge affirms
The "work" that Jankowicz is referring to, of course, is to once again steal a presidential election by silencing Republicans and promoting Democrats. This is what happened in 2020, and it is what Biden, Jankowicz, and others want to see happen again in 2024.
Because key federal agencies and their officials are now restricted from communicating with social media platforms like Facebook, it will be a lot harder for the Censorship Industrial Complex to ensure another Biden "win" in 2024.
"It has been suggested that without such a check in place, the government's efforts could easily spill over into manipulating public discourse and controlling information, with potentially dangerous effects on free speech and political balance," reported Reclaim the Net about what Judge Doughty's injunction accomplishes.
In support of the arguments posed by the Republican attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri, who filed Missouri v. Biden, Judge Doughty agrees that the Biden regime's censorship tactics infringe on the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
"He expressed the sentiment that the government seemed to be exploiting its power to stifle opposing voices, and he ominously compared the handling of social media content by the administration during the COVID pandemic to the 'Orwellian Ministry of Truth,'" reports indicate.
Jankowicz, meanwhile, continues to defend the Biden regime's censorship operations, arguing that they are not actually censorship but are merely protection to ensure a free and fair election in 2024.
Jankowicz is hardly impartial, seeing as how she was initially named as one of the defendants in the case before being removed after leaving her role at the Disinformation Governance Board, which also no longer exists.
Judge Doughty's ruling is only temporary, just to be clear. It aims to send a very strong message that government interference in the digital public square must be carefully and appropriately scrutinized to protect American citizens from their own rogue government.
Judge Doughty also affirmed that the federal government cannot pressure or otherwise coerce social media companies to remove, delete, or otherwise hide or silence "protected free speech," which is any free speech Americans choose to utter or type – as long as it is lawful.
Whether Big Government obeys Judge Doughty's orders is a whole other matter. With the way the left has been heading in terms of flouting the law, it would hardly be surprising to learn that Biden's collusion with Big Tech is still happening and even escalating the closer we get to the 2024 election.
Censorship is antithetical to a free and open society. Learn more at Censorship.news.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.