Senate Judicial Hearing – “Breaking the News: Censorship, Suppression in 2020 Election” held on November 17, 2020.
Witnesses: Jack Dorsey/CEO Twitter
Mark Zuckerberg/CEO Facebook
In regard to the obvious role social network giants, Twitter and Facebook, have played in dispensing information, flagging election posts, flagging accounts of individuals with specific political viewpoints, censoring posts of specific political content, locking or banning accounts of people in support of specific political viewpoints, or deleting accounts sharing beliefs, opinions, or analysis about the outcome of the 2020 Presidential Election in these United States of America, the Senate called a Judiciary Hearing on Tuesday November 17, 2020 to address these issues specifically with two the CEOs of aforementioned social networks. This is not the first time Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, or Jack Dorsey of Twitter have paid a visit to Washington D.C. and sat down to answer questions under oath about their business, its role in social opinion shaping, and the legality of the actions taken against those of a specific political viewpoint or party.
Let’s be specific: In most, if not all cases, these actions are against individuals registered as Republican, individuals self-identified as Conservative or Constitutional, self-identified as President Trump supporters, whom openly supported President Trump, shared opinions in support of Trump as victor of the 2020 Presidential election, or shared opinions against or not in favor of Democrat nominee Joe Biden or not in favor of Democrat policy or actions.
The stage set, one wonders exactly how this hearing may have gone with GOP senators on one side of the coin and Democrat senators on the other. Senator Lindsey Graham led hearing opening with questions about who sets policy at the respective companies as users of the social media sites may have noted a series of policy changes prompted randomly seemingly throughout the first term of Republican President Donald Trump, but never more frequently than the weeks leading up to and beyond the 2020 Presidential Elections. Graham also opened with the question of who the companies used as ‘fact checkers,’ Zuckerberg replying the use of organizations approved by the Pointer Institute, including: Reuters, the AP, USA Today, Fact Check (dot) org, Science Feedback, and Politfact among others. Senator Cruz took Twitter’s Dorsey to task in regards to rampant voter fraud, citing a case in Texas of a woman indicted with 134 counts of voter fraud, and Senator Hawley laying down the heat by calling out the use of the internal ‘Tasks’ program that is used by Facebook employees whom are part of groups such as” the “Integrity Team,” and the “Hate Speech Engineering Team” that is in charge of identifying what hashtags, websites, and individuals to ban from their platform. Standout interactions included a calm, almost conversational chat from Senator Kennedy who implemented a cordial commonsense approach that was almost irrefutable by witnesses alike, and a fiery close by Senator Blackburn who not only pointed out their contradictions in profile censorship, but spoke on her own behalf as being flagged on comments she made that had nothing to do with the elections.
The painfully obvious stand down of the Democrat senators in questioning the two CEOs, with exception to former presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar who asked questions regarding apparent violating possible antitrust laws (which they may be looking at implementing) for making it harder for some platforms to integrate with their own, citing the monopoly Facebook may have been forming with the acquirement of Instagram, a “nascent” [platform] that “if rose to power could hurt [Facebook].” Other senators avoided such questioning and focused on the social media websites’ lack of follow through and integrity in regards to banning certain profiles. Senator Blumenthal, for example, pressed Zuckerberg about why he had not banned Steve Bannon’s account and wanted him to commit to doing so. Senator Feinstein pressed Dorsey about President Trump’s account and asked why he’d been allowed to spread conspiracy threats about the outcome of the election. She stated it was not enough that his tweet about 2.7 million votes being deleted to merely be flagged, saying Trump tweeted false information with no basis in facts. Still others on the panel, such as Senator Whitehouse, soft balled the CEOs allowing them to defer to a written response.
The most egregious of the Senators, however, went to Hawaii senator, Mazie Hirono who emphasized the “truth is Joe Biden won as confirmed by the A.P.” and other “major news networks.” Senator Hirono, whom often comes off like a scathing snake in the grass, unrelenting and unrepentant, did not feel merely flagging tweets was enough in the case of President Trump.
This reporter finds it hard to believe that these Democrat Senators, proud members of the Coup Party, continue to carry the fire for the A.P. and other news networks as if these agencies are those that determine the outcome of the election. If it is not enough to flag a comment about President Trump to spread “false information” about the outcome of the election, is it not enough to flag the tweets of such treasonous senators that have ignored the process of declaring elections, and speaking at this hearing and before the American people as if the A.P. and other news agencies determine the winner of the 2020 Presidential Election? Perhaps they depend on the thought that their constituency does not know the process by which the winner of a presidential election is determined. They have ignored the fact that at the time of this hearing no states had declared a winner, let alone certified their respective contest. They have ignored the fact that each states electors had not met to cast the vote for each contest. Even during the 2004 elections, Democrat nominee Al Gore did not concede the race until mid December. Some states allow up to a month after the election to certify the winning vote. Amid the claims of unruly discrepancies and behavior at poll cites by Democrat representatives that have been reported in hundreds of sworn affidavits, and the mounting evidence of voting and ballot fraud as purported in unsecure vote counting software and sudden inclusion of illegitimate ballots that appear to be “stuffing the ballot box,” should these senators reconsider their choice of words when disseminating opinions and points-of-view? Would this not be the sensible, responsible, and American thing to do? Clearly not for members of the Democrat Party, those speaking on behalf of what this reporter has legitimately rechristened, the Coup Party.