Hillary Clinton Wants Increased Censorship and Control Over U.S. Social Media Platforms


Posted originally on the CTH October 6, 2024 | Sundance

First, we need background context.

The latter part of 2010 through 2011 was a key period in the Obama presidency.  On the cusp of a midterm election shellacking, with domestic focus on the issues around Obamacare, the Obama team and Hillary Clinton team were also intent on fueling the “Arab Spring” and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya and Egypt.

With background research provided by the U.S. State Dept and Rivkin Project in France, a petri-dish dish experiment to see if French culture could be diluted and enhanced with “brotherhood-style” multiculturalism, Hillary and Barry then fine-tuned the mechanics.  Secretary Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power and Susan Rice quickly convinced President Obama to help leverage his Silicon Valley allies.

As a workaround to stop Hosni Mubarak and Muamar Kaddafi from controlling information flow and putting down the protests, the social media platforms of Twitter and Facebook were enlisted to assist the Brotherhood in Egypt and Libya respectively.  The U.S-designated Brotherhood partners were given support, communication and influence through Twitter and Facebook to organize their protests.

In 2011 the official merge of U.S. social media platforms to assist the U.S. State Dept foreign policy agenda was created.  In many ways this merge was the inflection point for government to begin controlling social media, Libya and Egypt were the BETA test for what would later be deployed domestically.

Seeing the success and influence of the Arab Spring experiment, in 2012 President Obama signed HR-5736, with an addition to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013.  The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act, contained within the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2013, eased some restrictions so that media produced by the U.S. Agency for Global Media and intended for foreign audiences could be distributed domestically upon request, according to its text. Prior to its passage, the propaganda content was banned from being disseminated in America.

This move made it possible to deploy the same social media tactics domestically.  Within the Twitter Files, you will note how 2012 and 2013 are key periods when the Dept of Homeland Security began exploring their new influence partnership in social media.   For the next ten years, that partnership created various sub-set silos within the government.

DHS, FBI and Intelligence Community offices now had direct communication lines into Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Google, WhatsAp, etc.  However, Telegram and TikTok were not around and not part of the partnership.  What two platforms have been targeted recently?… Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

The Arab Spring was the BETA test, the proving ground.  Then they went domestic with the same operation.

The results of the domestic operation, the public-private partnership, later became stunningly visible in the COVID-19 censorship operation as well as the government influence operation in the aftermath of the 2020 election.  However, most recently there has been some pushback from both originating entities; Twitter – via Elon Musk, and Facebook – via a regretful Mark Zuckerberg.

Remember, Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State when this entire system was originating.

This is the fullest context to absorb the video soundbite below.  Hillary Clinton is upset that control over social media platforms is slipping away. Hillary Clinton now saying, ‘we lose total control’ if we don’t ‘Moderate & Monitor’ social media more. WATCH:

.

Hillary Clinton is frustrated because from her perspective so much progress had been made.

Now, suddenly, with increased scrutiny and a more awakened public seeing the consequences, it is harder for the government to execute their domestic propaganda operations.  Even the labeling and categorization through “mis-dis-mal-information” does not appear to be working.

Within the recent WEF discussion, Secretary Kerry outlines how freedom of speech is a ‘threat to the global democracy‘ because the governing officials have a difficult time controlling information.  Kerry goes on to posit how the next administration, presumably in his hope Kamala Harris, will forcefully structure all the tools of government to stop Americans from using the first amendment to freely speak about issues.

Governing is too challenging, according to Kerry, when the government cannot stop people from seeking and discovering information that is against their interests.  Effective governing required compliant adherence to a singular ideology.  Against the backdrop of COVID-19 and a host of similarly related government narratives, if people are free to find alternative information and think for themselves, they become increasingly more difficult to control.  Yes, this is said quite openly.  This is the mindset of those in power.  WATCH: 

.

On a positive note, millions of people now accurately understand why it is so important to refute the terms “mis-dis-mal information.”  When CTH initially warned about the labeling, most people did not understand; however, as the consequences begin to surface, I would argue almost a majority of people now understand.

…”There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation”.  There is only information you accept and information you do not accept.  You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.”… 

The absence of control creates fear.

Hung Cao Escaped Communism & Is Now Running For U.S. Senate to Save America From the Communist Left


Posted originally on Rumble By Charlie Kirk show on: Oct 05, 2024 at 7:30 pm EST

Natalie Winters: “They Will Do Anything They Can To KILL Populism”


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannons War Room on: Oct 05, 2024 at 08:00 pm EST

Natalie Winters: Did The Pentagon Just Legalize Assassination?


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannons War Room on: Oct 05, 2024 at 07:00 pm EST

The Mary McCord Discussion Enhances So Many Questions About DOJ Targeting of President Trump


Posted originally on the CTH on October 4, 2024 | Sundance

A recent soundbite shared on the Twitter platform aligns with so many aspects about how the IC targets their enemies, and how the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) then weaponizes the opportunities provided by the U.S intelligence apparatus.

Notice in this short video how Mary McCord positions the power structure of the DOJ-NSD silo in deference to the Intelligence Community (IC). This is a critical path within the next step to American’s “great awakening.” In the past we have outlined how the DOJ-NSD weaponizes their Lawfare by using “National Security Information,” or what the insiders call “NSI.”

As an outcome of the way our checks and balances have been modified against our interests, the judicial branch has repeatedly deferred to the DOJ around the issue of “national security.” In fact, if the DOJ labels any Lawfare approach as a national security matter the subsequent evidence therein, the NSI (even when not seen) is accepted by the judicial branch without question. The judicial branch defers to the executive on all matters defined by the executive as “national security.”

This is the area of exploit being discussed by Mary McCord in this segment. However, notice there is one apparatus that can supercede the DOJ-NSD’s ability to weaponize Nat Sec Information, that’s the power of the intelligence apparatus. WATCH:

McCord notes how she and Andrew Weissmann navigate through the process of using NSI as they move toward their target; the most common reference is their political opposition, Donald J Trump.

If there is one Lawfare operative who has escaped scrutiny for her corrupt endeavors, it would be Mary McCord. More than any other Lawfare operative within Main Justice, Mary McCord sits at the center of every table in the manufacturing of cases against Donald Trump. {GO DEEP} Mary McCord’s husband is Sheldon Snook; he was the right hand to the legal counsel of Chief Justice John Roberts when the Dobbs decision was leaked.

When the Carter Page FISA application was originally assembled by the FBI and DOJ, there was initial hesitancy from within the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) about submitting the application, because it did not have enough citations in evidence (the infamous ‘Woods File’).  That’s why the Steele Dossier ultimately became important.  It was the Steele Dossier that provided the push, the legal cover needed for the DOJ-NSD to submit the application for a Title-1 surveillance warrant against the campaign of Donald J. Trump.

When the application was finally assembled for submission to the FISA court, the head of the DOJ-NSD was John Carlin.  Carlin quit working for the DOJ-NSD in late September 2016 just before the final application was submitted (October 21,2016).  John Carlin was replaced by Deputy Asst. Attorney General, Mary McCord.

♦ When the FISA application was finally submitted (approved by Sally Yates and James Comey), it was Mary McCord who did the actual process of filing the application and gaining the Title-1 surveillance warrant.

A few months later, February 2017, with Donald Trump now in office as President, it was Mary McCord who went with Deputy AG Sally Yates to the White House to confront White House legal counsel Don McGahn over the Michael Flynn interview with FBI agents.  The surveillance of Flynn’s calls was presumably done under the auspices and legal authority of the FISA application Mary McCord previously was in charge of submitting.

♦ At the time the Carter Page application was filed (October 21, 2016), Mary McCord’s chief legal counsel inside the office was a DOJ-NSD lawyer named Michael Atkinson.  In his role as the legal counsel for the DOJ-NSD, it was Atkinson’s job to review and audit all FISA applications submitted from inside the DOJ.  Essentially, Atkinson was the DOJ internal compliance officer in charge of making sure all FISA applications were correctly assembled and documented.

♦ When the anonymous CIA whistleblower complaint was filed against President Trump for the issues of the Ukraine call with President Zelensky, the Intelligence Community Inspector General had to change the rules for the complaint to allow an anonymous submission.  Prior to this change, all intelligence whistleblowers had to put their name on the complaint.  It was this 2019 IGIC who changed the rules.  Who was the Intelligence Community Inspector General?  Michael Atkinson.

When ICIG Michael Atkinson turned over the newly authorized anonymous whistleblower complaint to the joint House Intelligence and Judiciary Committee (Schiff and Nadler chairs), who did Michael Atkinson give the complaint to?  Mary McCord.

Yes, after she left main justice, Mary McCord took the job of working for Chairman Jerry Nadler and Chairman Adam Schiff as the chief legal advisor inside the investigation that led to the construction of articles of impeachment.   As a consequence, Mary McCord received the newly permitted anonymous whistleblower complaint from her old office colleague Michael Atkinson.

♦ During his investigation of the Carter Page application, Inspector General Michael Horowitz discovered an intentional lie inside the Carter Page FISA application (directly related to the ‘Woods File’), which his team eventually tracked to FBI counterintelligence division lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith.  Eventually Clinesmith was criminally charged with fabricating evidence (changed wording on an email) in order to intentionally falsify the underlying evidence in the FISA submission.

When John Durham took the Clinesmith indictment to court, the judge in the case was James Boasberg.

♦ In addition to being a DC criminal judge, James Boasberg is also a FISA court judge who signed-off on one of the renewals for the FISA application that was submitted using fraudulent evidence fabricated by Kevin Clinesmith.  In essence, now the presiding judge over the FISA court, Boasberg was the FISC judge who was tricked by Clinesmith, and now the criminal court judge in charge of determining Clinesmith’s legal outcome.  Judge Boasberg eventually sentenced Clinesmith to 6 months probation.

As an outcome of continued FISA application fraud and wrongdoing by the FBI, in their exploitation of searches of the NSA database, Presiding FISC Judge James Boasberg appointed an amici curiae advisor to the court who would monitor the DOJ-NSD submissions and ongoing FBI activities.

Who did James Boasberg select as a FISA court amicus?  Mary McCord.

♦ SUMMARY:  Mary McCord submitted the original false FISA application to the court using the demonstrably false Dossier.  Mary McCord participated in the framing of Michael Flynn.  Mary McCord worked with ICIG Michael Atkinson to create a fraudulent whistleblower complaint against President Trump; and Mary McCord used that manipulated complaint to assemble articles of impeachment on behalf of the joint House Intel and Judiciary Committee.  Mary McCord then took up a defensive position inside the FISA court to protect the DOJ and FBI from sunlight upon all the aforementioned corrupt activity.

You can clearly see how Mary McCord would be a person of interest if anyone was going to start digging into corruption internally within the FBI, DOJ or DOJ-NSD.

What happened next….

November 3, 2021 – In Washington DC – “Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and the House Jan. 6 Select Committee has tapped Mary McCord, who once ran the Justice Department’s National Security Division, for representation in its fight to obtain former President Donald Trump’s White House records. (read more)

That’s the context; now I want to go back a little.

First, when did Mary McCord become “amicus” to the FISA court?  ANSWER: When the court (Boasberg) discovered IG Michael Horowitz was investigating the fraudulent FISA application.  In essence, the FISA Court appointed the person who submitted the fraudulent filing, to advise on any ramifications from the fraudulent filing.  See how that works?

Now, let’s go deeper….

When Mary McCord went to the White House with Sally Yates to talk to white house counsel Don McGhan about the Flynn call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak, and the subsequent CBS interview with VP Pence, where Pence’s denial of any wrongdoing took place, the background narrative in the attack against Flynn was the Logan Act.

The construct of the Logan Act narrative was pure Lawfare, and DAG Sally Yates with Acting NSD AAG Mary McCord were the architects.

Why was the DOJ National Security Division concerned with a conflict between what Pence said on CBS and what Flynn said about his conversations with Kislyak?

This is where a big mental reset is needed.  Flynn did nothing wrong. The incoming National Security Advisor can say anything he wants with the Russian ambassador, short of giving away classified details of any national security issue.  In December of 2016, if Michael Flynn wanted to say Obama was an a**hole, and the Trump administration disagreed with everything he ever did, the incoming NSA was free to do so.  There was simply nothing wrong with that conversation – regardless of content.

So, why were McCord and Yates so determined to make an issue in media and in confrontation with the White House?  Why did the DOJ-NSD even care?  This is the part that people overlooked when the media narrative was driving the news cycle.  People got too stuck in the weeds and didn’t ask the right questions.

Some entity, we discover later was the FBI counterintelligence division, was monitoring Flynn’s calls.  They transcribed a copy of the call between Flynn and Kislyak, and that became known as the “Flynn Cuts” as described within internal documents, and later statements.

After the Flynn/Kislyak conversation was leaked to the media, Obama asked ODNI Clapper how that call got leaked.  Clapper went to the FBI on 1/4/17 and asked FBI Director James Comey.  Comey gave Clapper a copy of the Flynn Cuts which Clapper then took back to the White House to explain to Obama.

Obama’s White House counsel went bananas, because Clapper had just walked directly into the Oval Office with proof the Obama administration was monitoring the incoming National Security Advisor.

Obama’s plausible deniability of the Trump surveillance was lost as soon as Clapper walked in with the written transcript.

That was the motive for the 1/5/17 Susan Rice memo, and the reason for Obama to emphasize “buy the book” three times.

It wasn’t that Obama didn’t know already; the problem was that a document trail now existed (likely a CYA from Comey) that took away Obama’s plausible deniability of knowledge.

The January 5th meeting documented by Susan Rice was quickly organized to mitigate this issue.

Knowing the Flynn Cuts were created simultaneously with the phone call, and knowing how it was quickly decided to use the Logan Act as a narrative against Flynn and Trump, we can be very sure both McCord and Yates had read that transcript before they went to the White House.  [Again, this is the entire purpose of them going to the White House to confront McGhan with their manufactured concerns.]

So, when it comes to ‘who leaked’ the reality of the Flynn/Kislyak call to the media, the entire predicate for the Logan Act violation – in hindsight – I would bet a donut it was Mary McCord.

But wait, there’s more…. 

Now we go back to McCord’s husband, Sheldon Snook.

Sheldon was working for the counsel to John Roberts.  The counsel to the Chief Justice has one job, to review the legal implications of issues before the court and advise Justice John Roberts.  The counsel to the Chief Justice knows everything happening in the court and is the sounding board for any legal issues impacting the Supreme Court.

In his position as the right hand of the counsel to the chief justice, Sheldon Snook would know everything happening inside the court.

At the time, there was nothing bigger inside the court than the Alito opinion known as the Dobb’s Decision – the returning of abortion law to the states.  Without any doubt, the counsel to Chief Justice Roberts would have that decision at the forefront of his advice and counsel.  By extension, this puts the actual written Alito opinion in the orbit of Sheldon Snook.

After the Supreme Court launched a heavily publicized internal investigation into the leaking of the Dobbs decision (Alito opinion), something interesting happened.  Sheldon Snook left his position.   If you look at the timing of the leak, the investigation and the Sheldon Snook exit, the circumstantial evidence looms large.

Of course, given the extremely high stakes, the institutional crisis with the public discovering the office of the legal counsel to the Chief Justice likely leaked the decision, such an outcome would be catastrophic for the institutional credibility.  In essence, it would be Robert’s office who leaked the opinion to the media.

If you were Chief Justice John Roberts and desperately needed to protect the integrity of the court, making sure such a thermonuclear discovery was never identified would be paramount.  Under the auspices of motive, Sheldon Snook would exit quietly.  Which is exactly what happened.

The timeline holds the key.

Remember the stories of the J6 investigative staff all going to work for Jack Smith on the investigation of Donald Trump?   Well, Mary McCord was a member of that team [citation]; all indications are that her background efforts continue today as a quiet member of the Special Counsel team that is still attacking Donald Trump.

To give you an idea of the scope of influence of Mary McCord as a key functionary, consider what we can document.

♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign.

♦ McCord created the “Logan Act” claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House.

♦ McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

♦ McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.

♦ McCord led and organized the impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create.

♦ McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz newly gained NSD oversight and FISA review.

♦ McCord joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the lawfare angles they deployed.

♦ McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia.

♦ McCord is working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump.

In short, Mary McCord is the lawfare string that winds through every legal ‘stop Trump’ effort, and her primary partner in this endeavor is Andrew Weissmann.  In this next video segment, notice what the “how to use that” quote is referencing.

It’s not Jack Smith per se’, any more than it was Robert Mueller.

Jack Smith and Robert Mueller are/were simply the front men of the Lawfare band.

October is Here – It’s Now All Out War with Russia


Posted originally on Oct 3, 2024 By Martin Armstrong 

US Russia Ukraine

The Russian Neocons have forced Putin to accept reality. Zelensky’s “VICTORY PLAN” is the complete destruction of Russia. As I have said, I have had employees in both Kiev and Donetsk. The two would never talk to each other, and the one from Kiev attending our conference in Athens refused to take any flight hole that connected through Moscow. If you ever brought a bottle of Russian vodka to dinner in Kiev, it was an insult.

Israel vs Iran 1

Russia has terminated any peace negotiations. The Russian Neocons have made their point that Zelensky is purely interested in killing every possible Russia. There is no more resolution to this conflict than there are between Israel and Iran.

Ruble M Array 10 3 24
Ukraine_Hryvnia M Array 10 3 24

Our computer has pinpointed October as the shift in trend. We can even see a Panic Cycle showing up in November. Ukraine will NOT survive—that much is clear. Russians’ hatred for events involving previous generations will ensure that Ukraine is not a country that will survive. That may not be popular to say, but this is the UNBAISED forecast of the computer—not my personal opinion. We can see that volatility was scheduled to begin rising here in October.

Romanian Leu Spot M Array 10 3 24

The problem is that October is showing up as an important turning point in many surrounding nations as well. Watch the arrays for the daily and weekly targets as we proceed into this month.

Americans come last – ALWAYS!!!!!!


Posted originally on Oct 3, 2024 By Martin Armstrong 

Biden Harris

The Biden Administration, under the Neocons’ control, has sent Ukraine $24.4 billion. The Ukrainian population is about 28 million, minus all the ethnic Russians in the Donbas, which would be about 42 million combined. That means the Biden Administration has sent the equivalent of $871 per person, but it does not go to the people. If we subtract the 8 million that fled and live in the EU, it will be $1,200 per person in Ukraine. FEMA has been generous and is handing $750 to the homes impacted by this storm, Helene.

Biden is paying all the salaries and pensions of those in the Ukraine government. He is handing $9,000 per illegal alien he has let in to vote Democrat so they can screw everyone who has voted against the Democrats.

Driveway

I stated that I went to bed with my two dogs, and we slept the night. Some commented on how I could possibly sleep through the night. This was not a direct hit. Just about everyone I have spoken to, their insurance companies are denying all claims because they say this was not caused by wind. This was a tidal surge – not wind. So I could sleep. There was now a howling sound. I woke up, and my house was fine, but 4 feet deep sand was by the end of my driveway. This area has NEVER been flooded. Nobody has ever seen a storm of this nature. It was 150 miles offshore from me.

20241002_171133

All election appliances are out on the street. Pinellas County has just closed the dump, for it is full. There is now nowhere to go. The streets are full of everyone’s beds and belongings. Many have lost everything. Because I had a generator, some neighbors came here just to charge their phones.

Some restaurants that have survived offer free food to those with nothing. And This Biden Administration offered them $750 when the insurance companies denied all claims? They are handing free healthcare to illegal aliens to make sure they vote to ensure the Democrats can fine destroy America since they are firming in the clutches of the Neocons who want to rule the world.

The United States CAN NOT survive divided in this manner

Natalie Winters: “Your Government Hates You”


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannons War Room on: Oct 01, 2024 at 06:00 pm EST

Ep. 3464b – [DS] Lit The Fuse, World Is On Fire, Chaos Is Everywhere, Dark To Light


Posted originally on Rumble By X 22 Report on: Oct o1, 2024 at 8:00 pm EST

Matt Taibbi Full Speech at “Rescue the Republic” Event in Washington, DC


Posted originally on the CTH on October 1, 2024 | Sundance

Independent journalist, Matt Taibbi delivered a strong speech at the recent ‘Rescue the Republic’ event. Taibbi outlines the issue of a lost fourth estate, where most common media have aligned with institutional systems to betray their original intent. The media now operates in a manner to control and shape information in order to shape public opinion to the benefit of their paymasters.

Known for his sharp critiques of power, all power, and willing to put himself at the forefront in opposition to any system that fails to represent traditional liberal values, Matt Taibbi discusses the importance of free speech, media integrity, and holding institutions accountable in today’s polarized political landscape. He speaks honestly, forthrightly and without pretense as he delivers remarks. [Salty language alert] WATCH:

[Transcript] Thank you.

This is every amateur speaker’s dream, to follow Russell Brand. Thanks a lot, God!

I was once taught you should always open an important speech by making reference to a shared experience.

So what do all of us at “Rescue the Republic” have in common? Nothing!

In a pre-Trump universe chimpanzees would be typing their fourth copy of Hamlet before RFK Jr., Robert Malone, Zuby, Tulsi Gabbard, Russell, Bret Weinstein and I would organically get together for any reason, much less an event like this.

True, everyone speaking has been censored. The issues were all different, but everyone disagreed with “authoritative voices” about something.

Saying no is very American. From “Don’t Tread on Me!” to “Nuts” to “You Cannot Be Serious!” defiance is in our DNA.

Now disagreement is seen as threat, and according to John Kerry, must be “hammered out of existence.” The former Presidential candidate just complained at a World Economic Forum meeting that “it’s really hard to govern” and “our First Amendment stands as a major block” to the important work of hammering out unhealthy choices.

In the open he said this! I was telling Tim Pool about this backstage and he asked, “Was black ooze coming out of his mouth?”

Kerry added that it’s “really hard to build consensus,” and told Forum members they need to “win the right to govern” and “be free to implement change.”

What do they need to be free of? The First Amendment, yes, but more importantly: us. Complainers. That’s our shared experience. We are obstacles to consensus.

My name is Matt Taibbi. I’ve been a reporter for 35 years, covering everything from Pentagon accounting to securities fraud to drone warfare. My son a few years ago asked what I do. I said, “Daddy writes about things that are so horrible they’re interesting.”

Two years ago, I was invited by Elon Musk to look at internal correspondence at Twitter. This led to stories called the Twitter Files whose main revelation was a broad government effort to suppress speech.

I was invited to talk about risks to the First Amendment, but to spare the suspense: that battle is lost. State censorship is a fact in most of the West. In February our European allies began observing the Digital Services Act, which requires Internet platforms to enforce judgments of state-appointed content reviewers called “trusted flaggers.”

Everything we found in the Twitter Files fits in a sentence: an alphabet soup of enforcement agencies informally is already doing pretty much the same thing as Europe’s draconian new law.

Now, is it against the law when a White House official calls Facebook and asks to ban a journalist for writing that the Covid vaccine “doesn’t stop infection or transmission”? I think hell yes. It certainly violates the spirit of the First Amendment, even if judges are found to say it keeps to the letter.

But this is post-9/11 America. Whether about surveillance or torture or habeas corpus or secret prisons or rendition or any of a dozen other things, WE IGNORE LAWS. Institutional impunity is the chief characteristic of our current form of government.

We have concepts like “illegal but necessary”: the government may torture, the public obviously can’t. The state may intercept phone calls, you can’t. The state may search without warrants, assassinate, snatch geolocations from your phones, any of a hundred things officially prohibited, but allowed. This concept requires that officials have special permission to ignore laws.

Ten years ago, we were caught spying on three different French presidents as well as companies like BNP Paribas, Credit Agricole, Peugeot, Renault, and Total. Barack Obama called the French to apologize, but did we stop? We did indict the person who released the news, Julian Assange.

Congratulations to Julian on getting out, by the way. And shame on every journalist who did not call for his release.

WE IGNORE LAWS. It’s what America does. With this in mind, our government has moved past censorship to the larger project of changing the American personality. They want a more obedient, timorous, fearful citizen. Their tool is the Internet, a vast machine for doling out reward and punishment through likes and views, shaming or deamplification. The mechanics are complicated but the core concept is simple: you’re upranked for accepting authority, downranked for questioning it, with questions of any kind increasingly viewed as a form of disinformation.

Let me pause to say something about America’s current intellectual class, from which the “anti-disinformation” complex comes. By the way: there are no working-class censors, poor censors, hungry censors. The dirty secret of “content moderation” everywhere is that it’s a tiny sliver of the educated rich correcting everyone else. It’s telling people what fork to use, but you can get a degree in it.

America has the most useless aristocrats in history. Even the French dandies marched to the razor by the Jacobins were towering specimens of humanity compared to the Michael Haydens, John Brennans, James Clappers, Mike McFauls and Rick Stengels who make up America’s self-appointed behavior police.

In prerevolutionary France even the most drunken, depraved, debauched libertine had to be prepared to back up an insolent act with a sword duel to the death. Our aristocrats pee themselves at the sight of mean tweets. They have no honor, no belief, no poetry, art, or humor, no patriotism, no loyalty, no dreams, and no accomplishments. They’re simultaneously illiterate and pretentious, which is very hard to pull off.

They have one idea, not even an idea but a sensation: fear. Rightly so, because they snitch each other out at the drop of a hat; they’re afraid of each other, but they’re also terrified of everyone outside their social set and live in near-constant fear of being caught having an original opinion. They believe in the manner of herd animals, who also live whole lives without knowing an anxiety-free minute: they believe things with blinding zeal until 51% change their minds, and then like deer the rest bolt in that direction. We saw that with the Biden is sharp as a tack/No, Biden must step aside for the Politics of Joy switch.

I grew up a liberal Democrat and can’t remember having even most of the same beliefs as my friends. Now, millions of alleged intellectuals claim identical beliefs about vast ranges of issues and this ludicrous mass delusion is the precondition for “disinformation studies,” really the highly unscientific science of punishing deviation from the uniform belief set — what another excommunicated liberal, my friend Thomas Frank, calls the “Utopia of Scolding.”

“Freedom of speech” is a beautiful phrase, strong, optimistic. It has a ring to it. But it’s being replaced in the discourse by “disinformation” and “misinformation,” words that aren’t beautiful but full of the small, pettifogging, bureaucratic anxiety of a familiar American villain: the busybody, the prohibitionist, the Nosey Parker, the snoop.

H.L. Mencken defined Puritanism as the “haunting fear that someone, somewhere is happy.” That streak of our early European settlers unfortunately survives in us and keeps surfacing through moral panics. Four hundred years ago it was witches, then it was Catholic immigrants, then “the devil’s music,” comic books, booze, communists, and now, information.

Because “freedom of speech” is now frequently described as a stalking horse for hate and discrimination — the UN High Commissioner Volker Türk scolded Elon Musk that “free speech is not a free pass” — it’s becoming one of those soon-to-be-extinct terms. Speech is mentioned in “reputable” media only as a possible vector for the informational disease known as misinformation. Soon all that will remain of the issue for most people is a flutter of the nerves, reminding them to avoid thinking about it.

The end game is not controlling speech. They’re already doing that. The endgame is getting us to forget we ever had anything to say.

To small thinkers free speech is a wilderness of potential threats. The people who built this country, whatever else you can say about them, weren’t small thinkers. They were big, big thinkers, and I mean that not just in terms of intellect but arrogance, gall, brass, audacity, cheek.

Kurt Vonnegut called the Founding Fathers Sea Pirates. He wasn’t far off. These people stole a continent from the King of England. And got away with it. Eminem said there ain’t no such thing as halfway crooks — there was nothing halfway about the Constitution authors.

James Madison, who wrote the First Amendment, foresaw the exact situation of a government that IGNORES LAWS. In fact, he was originally opposed to the Bill of Rights because he didn’t think “paper guarantees” could stop a corrupt government. So he put together a document designed to inspire a personality type that would resist efforts to undo the experiment.

Here an important quality came into play: Madison was a great writer. The 44 words of his First Amendment were composed with extraordinary subtlety:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment didn’t confer rights or entrust government with guaranteeing them. Instead, the Founders stood to the side and, like an old country recognizing a new country, simply acknowledged an eternal truth: the freedom of the human mind.

This is what censors never understand. Speech is free. Trying to stop it is like catching butterflies with a hammer, stopping a flood with a teaspoon… Choose your metaphor, but a fool’s errand. You can apply as many rules as you want, threaten punishment, lock people up. The human mind always sets its own course, often in spite of itself. As the poet William Ernest Henley explained:

It matters not how straight the gate,

How charged with punishment the scroll,

I am the master of my fate,

I am the captain of my soul.

Unlike the busybodies of the Internet Age, to whom words are just another overproduced, over-plentiful, unnecessary, and vaguely hazardous commodity like greenhouse gases or plastic soda bottles, people like Madison understood the value of language.

In 1787 you might have to walk a mile or five just to see a printed word. It was likely to be the Bible. I’m not religious, but I’ve read the Bible, and so of course did they. They knew the Gospel of John: “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.”

That was a reference to Genesis: In the beginning, God said “Let there be light,” and the world was born. For them, the idea of the word was suffused with the power of creation itself. This wasn’t law. This was metaphysics. It was cosmogony.

A little country run by a bunch of jumped-up tobacconists and corn farmers needed an ally to withstand the wrath of European royalty. They got it by lighting a match under human ingenuity and creativity and passion. It was rash, risky, reckless, and it worked.

What was the American personality? Madison said he hoped to strengthen the “will of the community,” but other revolutionaries weren’t quite so polite. Thomas Paine’s central message was that the humblest farmer was a towering moral giant compared to the invertebrate scum who wore crowns and lived in British castles.

Common Sense told us to stand up straight. Never bow, especially not to a politician, because as Paine explained — I want you to think of John Kerry and Hayden and Cheney here — “Men who look upon themselves as born to reign, and others to obey… are frequently the most ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions.”

Oscar Wilde noted ours was the only country in the world where being a kook was respectable. Every other country shunned the tinkerer or mad inventor and cheerfully donated them to us, turbocharging our American experiment.

We welcomed crazy and the world has light bulbs, the telephone, movies, airplanes, submarines, the Internet, false teeth, the Colt .45, rock and roll, hip-hop and monster dunks as a result. Wilde lampooned our ignorance and lack of artistic sophistication and tolerance for ugly words — hilariously he refused to speak at a town that named itself “Grigsville” — but his final observation was a supreme compliment:

The Americans are the best politically educated people in the world. It is well worth one’s while to go to a country which can teach us the beauty of the word FREEDOM and the value of the thing LIBERTY.

In my twenties, while traveling through the former Soviet Union, I noticed that people from other cultures often had hang-ups about authority. Men from autocratic countries in the Middle East always seemed to whisper out of the corners of their mouths, as if they were afraid someone might hear, even about meaningless things. They would say: “Listen, my friend, the only good song George Michael ever wrote was ‘Faith…’”

Why are we whispering? I’d ask. I don’t know, they’d say.

People who grew up in places with the Queen on their money were class-conscious and calibrated what they could say according to who else was at the table. Russians were like us, expressive and free-spirited and funny, but infected with terrible fatalism: they froze around badges and insignias and other symbols of authority as if they had magic power.

Over time I realized: I liked being an American. For the first time I was seeing the American experience through the eyes of foreigners. I did an interview once at a restaurant in Moscow called Scandanavia. A group of European diplomats was having a conference and complained about a table of loud American businessmen. A young Swedish waiter was sent to deal with them.

He leaned over to the biggest and loudest of these finance bros and said, “If you could keep your voice down, sir…”

The American turned and said:

“Is that a question?”

The kid froze. The American said: “You mean ‘Be quiet,’ right?”

“Yes.”

The American got up. “Look, you’re over here because a bunch of Belgians are too afraid to come over here themselves. You’re carrying that like the weight of the world. I can see it your shoulders. Let it go, man.”

Now those diplomats grew spines. “Hey,” they said. “We are not Belgians. We’re—”

“You’re Belgians,” the American snapped. Then he gave the floor to the kid who said, “Please be quiet.” The American took out a $100 bill and stuck it in the kid’s vest pocket. He walked around the rest of the night like he owned the place. He might have gone on to do just that.

After that I realized every American has a little bit of asshole in him. William Blake said, “Always be ready to speak your mind and a base man will avoid you.” Some struggle with this concept. Americans are born knowing it.

Incidentally propaganda is the same trick I saw in that restaurant. It’s always someone trying to make you feel bad for their weakness, their mistakes. Don’t be ground down by it. Stand up straight and give it back.

Which is why I say: Kerry, Hayden, Cheney, Adam Schiff, Craig Newmark, Reid Hoffman, Pierre Omidyar, Leon Panetta, and especially that Time editor turned self-appointed censor Rick Stengel should be packed in a rocket and launched into the fucking sun.

Let’s be clear about our language. Madison famously eschewed the word toleration or tolerance when it came to religion and insisted on the words freedom or liberty instead. This became the basis for the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which in turn became the basis for the Bill of Rights. That’s why we don’t have “toleration of religion” or “toleration of speech.” We have freedom of speech. The right word for the right time.

To the people who are suggesting that there are voices who should be ignored because they’re encouraging mistrust or skepticism of authority, or obstructing consensus: I’m not encouraging you to be skeptical of authority. I’m encouraging you to DEFY authority. That is the right word for this time.

To all those Snoops and Nosey Parkers sitting in their Homeland Security-funded “Centers of Excellence,” telling us day after day we must think as they say and vote as they say or else we’re traitorous Putin-loving fascists and enablers of “dangerous” disinformation:

Motherfucker, I’m an American. That shit does not work on me. And how can you impugn my patriotism, when you’re sitting in Klaus Schwab’s lap, apologizing for the First Amendment to a crowd of Europeans? Look in the mirror.

I’m not the problem. We’re not the problem.

You’re the problem.

YOU SUCK.

Thank you.

[END TRANSCRIPT]