GOV/MIL Leftists Call For New "Secret Police" Force To Spy On Trump Supporters (AN ABSOLUTELY MUST-READ THREAD)

marsh

TB Fanatic
[CANADA]


Opinion
Canadian government's proposed online harms legislation threatens our human rights
Social Sharing

No other liberal democracy in the world has been willing to accept these restrictions, writes Ilan Kogan



Ilan Kogan · for CBC Opinion · Posted: Oct 05, 2021 5:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 1 hour ago


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau takes part in a moment of silence in the House of Commons in recognition of four people killed in a truck attack in London, Ont. In the wake of the incident, which police say was a targeted attack on a Muslim family, Ottawa promised better regulation for online hate speech, but the new rules create more problems than they solve, writes Ilan Kogan. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)

The Canadian government is considering new rules to regulate how social media platforms moderate potentially harmful user-generated content. Already, the proposed legislation has been criticized by internet scholars — across the political spectrum — as some of the worst in the world.
Oddly, the proposed legislation reads like a list of the most widely condemned policy ideas globally. Elsewhere, these ideas have been vigorously protested by human rights organizations and struck down as unconstitutional. No doubt, the federal government's proposed legislation presents a serious threat to human rights in Canada.

The government's intentions are noble. The purpose of the legislation is to reduce five types of harmful content online: child sexual exploitation content, terrorist content, content that incites violence, hate speech, and non-consensual sharing of intimate images.

Even though this content is already largely illegal, further reducing its proliferation is a worthy goal. Governments around the world, and particularly in Europe, have introduced legislation to combat these harms. The problem is not the government's intention. The problem is the government's solution.

Serious privacy issues
The legislation is simple. First, online platforms would be required to proactively monitor all user speech and evaluate its potential for harm. Online communication service providers would need to take "all reasonable measures," including the use of automated systems, to identify harmful content and restrict its visibility.

Second, any individual would be able to flag content as harmful. The social media platform would then have 24 hours from initial flagging to evaluate whether the content was in fact harmful. Failure to remove harmful content within this period could trigger a stiff penalty: up to three per cent of the service provider's gross global revenue or $10 million, whichever is higher. For Facebook, that would be a penalty of $2.6 billion per post.

Proactive monitoring of user speech presents serious privacy issues. Without restrictions on proactive monitoring, national governments would be able to significantly increase their surveillance powers.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians from unreasonable searches. But under the proposed legislation, a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity would not be necessary for a service provider, acting on the government's behalf, to conduct a search. All content posted online would be searched. Potentially harmful content would be stored by the service provider and transmitted — in secret — to the government for criminal prosecution.


Under the proposed legislation, many innocent Canadians will be referred for criminal prosecution, writes Ilan Kogan. (Trevor Brine/CBC)

Canadians who have nothing to hide still have something to fear. Social media platforms process billions of pieces of content every day. Proactive monitoring is only possible with an automated system. Yet automated systems are notoriously inaccurate. Even Facebook's manual content moderation accuracy has been reported to be below 90 per cent.

Social media companies are not like newspapers; accurately reviewing every piece of content is operationally impossible. The outcome is uncomfortable: Many innocent Canadians will be referred for criminal prosecution under the proposed legislation.

But it gets worse. If an online communication service provider determined that your content was not harmful within the tight 24-hour review period, and the government later decided otherwise, the provider could lose up to three per cent of their gross global revenue. Accordingly, any rational platform would censor far more content than the strictly illegal. Human rights scholars call this troubling phenomenon "collateral censorship."

Identifying illegal content is difficult, and therefore the risk of collateral censorship is high. Hate speech restrictions may best illustrate the problem. The proposal expects platforms to apply the Supreme Court of Canada's hate speech jurisprudence. Identifying hate speech is difficult for courts, let alone algorithms or low-paid content moderators who must make decisions in mere seconds.

Although speech that merely offends is not hate speech, platforms are likely to remove anything that has even the slightest potential to upset. Ironically, the very minority groups the legislation seeks to protect are some of the most likely to be harmed. That's why so many Canadian anti-racism groups have opposed the legislation.

We must demand better
So, what to do about online harms? One step in the right direction is to recognize that not all harmful content is the same. For instance, it is far easier to identify child pornography than hate speech. Accordingly, the timelines for removing the former should be shorter than for the latter.

And although revenge pornography might be appropriate to remove solely upon a victim's request, offensive speech might need input from the poster and an independent agency or court before removal is required by law. Other jurisdictions draw distinctions. Canada should too.

Regulating online harms is a serious issue that the Canadian government, like all others, must tackle to protect its citizens. Child pornography, terrorist content, incitement, hate speech, and revenge pornography have no place in Canada. More can be done to limit their prevalence online.

But the proposed legislation creates far more problems than it solves. It reads as a collection of the worst policy ideas introduced around the world in the past decade. No other liberal democracy has been willing to accept these restrictions.

The threats to privacy and freedom of expression are obvious. Canadians must demand better.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Facebook Whistleblower Is Leftist Activist Repped By Lawyer For ‘Whistleblower’ Behind Trump Impeachment

By Luke Rosiak
Oct 5, 2021 DailyWire.com

Former Facebook employee Frances Haugen listens to opening statements during a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing entitled 'Protecting Kids Online: Testimony from a Facebook Whistleblower' on Capitol Hill October 5, 2021 in Washington, DC. Haugen left Facebook in May and provided internal company documents about Facebook to journalists and others, alleging that Facebook consistently chooses profit over safety. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

The Facebook whistleblower, Frances Haugen, has a record of donations to far-left Democrats and a history of raising issues about purported bias while at previous employers, a Daily Wire review found. She is working with Democrat operatives to roll out her complaint and has the same lawyers as the anonymous Ukraine “whistleblower” whose allegations led to Donald Trump’s impeachment, but who reportedly turned out to be then-Vice President Joe Biden’s top advisor on the country.

In a previous role at Pinterest, Frances Haugen was behind a “recent change to give users the option to filter searches to specific skin tones.” At Gigster, she gave a talk on how “if we don’t build with an eye towards inclusion, we can end up enshrining bias.”

In 2015, she complained that Google was not inclusive enough of women, saying: “I didn’t realize the way I had been worn down by being a woman in tech… the last team I was on at Google, it had a transsexual Eng[ineering] director, and as a result we had more transsexual women than cis women on our team, which also says something sad about the number of women in tech.”

“You don’t see them in major tech companies and when you do see them in major tech companies you see them in places that are in support roles like marketing or perhaps sales. I think that’s a problem,” she said.

According to public records, Haugen co-owns a house with Molly Tombley-McCann, a computer coder who made a “gamification tool to be a better ally.”

Haugen has made more than twenty federal campaign contributions since 2016, all of which have gone to Democrats, according to Federal Election Commission data. On January 13th, 2020, Haugen sent money to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s congressional campaign and a further contribution to her “Courage to Change” Political Action Committee. One of the most frequent recipients of her donations was the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

The Senate’s Sub-Committee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Data Security, which is chaired by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), invited her to testify to the panel on Tuesday to air her complaints, which consist in part of contending that Facebook did not censor enough speech. She says she was motivated to take action after a friend became “radicalized” by “misinformation.”

Despite having money for political donations, in January 2020, Haugen had a $44,000 federal tax lien placed against her for unpaid taxes, according to public records reviewed by The Daily Wire. The lien was released on May 17, 2021.

Her lawyers are now seeking to raise $50,000 on GoFundMe, money they say will go to covering legal expenses for the attorneys, who are otherwise working pro-bono.

Those lawyers are Whistleblower Aid, a group founded by Mark Zaid, who previously represented the national security official who alleged that Donald Trump inappropriately pressed the Ukraine president on a phone call to, in turn, investigate whether Joe Biden inappropriately pressed the country to drop an investigation into his son’s firm, Burisma.

The identity of that “whistleblower” — who did not have first-hand knowledge of the call — was fiercely shrouded. But some outlets reported that it was Eric Ciaramelli, Joe Biden’s top advisor on Ukraine. That position meant he could have been personally implicated by any misconduct Joe Biden may have undertaken around Ukraine during the Obama administration. It could have also been motivated by personal loyalty: Ciaramelli was close enough to Biden that Biden invited him as a guest to a State Department dinner.

In a roll-out that appeared carefully crafted by political and legal professionals, the allegation was leveled, led to a series of moves culminating in the impeachment of Trump, and shrank away, without the whistleblower’s name — and the potential conflicts it could bring — ever being revealed.

Before filing his complaint with the intelligence community inspector general, the whistleblower met with staff for Democrat Adam Schiff. Schiff later claimed “we have not spoken directly with the whistleblower,” a statement The Washington Post said was “flat-out-false.” The whistleblower, meanwhile, concealed from the inspector general that he had previously spoken to Congress about it. The complaint was filed the same month that Schiff hired Sean Misko, an NSC colleague of Ciaramelli, the Washington Examiner reported.

Haugen’s case has some similarities to the Ukraine/impeachment case. She carefully fed internal Facebook documents to the Wall Street Journal, working with Zaid and his law partners John Tye, a former Obama State Department official, and Andrew Bakaj, who worked for Democratic senators including Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

The public relations firm of former Obama aide Bill Burton, a company called Bryson Gillette helmed by a raft of Democratic operatives, is providing Haugen with “strategic communications guidance,” helping run what one Republican called “an incredibly well-orchestrated communications campaign,” the Free Beacon reported. Bryson Gillette also runs publicity for the nonprofit Center for Humane Technology, which has waged a policy war with Facebook.

Jen Psaki, Biden’s press secretary, worked for Bryson Gillette as a senior advisor until September 2020, with the Center for Humane Technology as one of her clients, according to ethics filings obtained by The Daily Wire. Bryson Gillette did not return a request for comment.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

"A Politically-Motivated Abuse Of Power" - GOP Rep. Rages At AG Garland's 'Weaponization' Of The DoJ Against Dissenting Parents

TUESDAY, OCT 05, 2021 - 05:56 PM

Update (1700ET): Republican Congressman for Colorado's 4th District, Ken Buck, has penned an excellent reply for Garland's overreach, taking apart the AG's "weaponization" of the DoJ point by point...

"Your memorandum is a politically-motivated abuse of power and displays a lack of reasoned, sound judgment... confronting parents to oppose the views of the Biden administration and its socialist agenda..."

View: https://twitter.com/RepKenBuck/status/1445449843376156674/photo/1


* * *
One day after a North Carolina school board adopted a policy that would discipline or dismiss teachers if they incorporate critical race theory (CRT) into their teaching of the history of the United States, The Epoch Times' Ivan Pentchoukov reports that Attorney General Merrick Garland on Oct. 4 announced a concentrated effort to target any threats of violence, intimidation, and harassment by parents toward school personnel.



The announcement also comes days after a national association of school boards asked the Biden administration to take “extraordinary measures” to prevent alleged threats against school staff that the association said was coming from parents who oppose mask mandates and the teaching of critical race theory.

Garland directed the FBI and U.S. attorneys in the next 30 days to convene meetings with federal, state, and local leaders within 30 days to “facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff,” according to a letter (pdf) the attorney general sent on Monday to all U.S. attorneys, the FBI director, the director of the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys, and the assistant attorney general of the DOJ’s criminal division.



According to the DOJ, further efforts will be rolled out in the coming days, including a task force that will determine how to use federal resources to prosecute offending parents as well as how to advise state entities on prosecutions in cases where no federal law is broken. The Justice Department will also provide training to school staff on how to report threats from parents and preserve evidence to aid in investigation and prosecution.
“In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools,” Garland wrote.
“While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views.”
School boards across the nation have increasingly become an arena for heated debate over culture, politics, and health. Parents groups have ramped up pressure on boards over the teaching of critical race theory and the imposition of mask mandates. The debate is split sharply along political lines, with Democrats largely in favor of critical race theory and mask mandates, and Republicans opposing both.

The amount and severity of the threats against officials are not known, but Garland’s letter suggests the phenomenon is widespread.

Full AG Garland Statement (with our thoughts):
MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; DIRECTOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR U.S. ATTORNEYS ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS
FROM: THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
SUBJECT: PARTNERSHIP AMONG FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL, TRIBAL, AND TERRITORIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TO ADDRESS THREATS AGAINST SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS, BOARD MEMBERS, TEACHERS, AND STAFF
In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation's public schools. While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views.
[ZH: But intimidating parents who dare to have the view that the nation's founding fathers and the founding documents are not in fact systemically racist and does not want their children taught that is the case is ok?]
Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation's core values. Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to he able to do their work without fear for their safety.
[ZH: "Dedication" to a "proper education" is admirable; indoctrination in Marxism is not]
The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate. In the coming days, the Department will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.
[ZH: What exactly is the crime?]
Coordination and partnership with local law enforcement is critical to implementing these measures for the benefit of our nation's nearly 14,000 public school districts. To this end, I am directing the Federal Bureau of Investigation, working with each United States Attorney, to convene meetings with federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial leaders in each federal judicial district within 30 days of the issuance of this memorandum. These meetings will facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff, and will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response.
[ZH: We wonder how many local law enforcement officials, while busily watching for vaccine passport offenders, and mask-mandate refusers, will acquiesce to enforcing these new laws to protect the very people who are preaching that America's systemic racism starts with the men (and women) in blue?]
The Department is steadfast in its commitment to protect all people in the United States from violence, threats of violence, and other forms of intimidation and harassment.
[ZH: Presumably intimidation and emotional harassment of young white boys and girls for their 'whiteness', privilege, and systemic racism is beyond that 'protection'?]
As Chris Rufo (@RealChrisRufo) tweeted: "The Biden administration is rapidly repurposing federal law enforcement to target political opposition."

1633473514372.png

Rufo goes on to note that:
"Neither the Attorney General's memo nor the full Justice Department press release cites any significant, credible threat. This is a blatant suppression tactic, designed to dissuade citizens from participating in the democratic process at school boards."


Parents have led the charge against controversial issues such as Critical Race Theory (CRT), masking mandates and vaccine requirements.

CRT holds that America is fundamentally racist, yet it teaches people to view every social interaction and person in terms of race. Its adherents pursue “antiracism” through the end of merit, objective truth and the adoption of race-based policies.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1385180596058550279
2:06 min

In Loudoun County, Virginia, two parents were arrested in June for trespassing while protesting CRT and a transgender policy at the school district because they refused to leave the rowdy meeting that was declared an unlawful assembly.

In July, a man was arrested at a school board meeting and charged with a felony because a gun reportedly fell out of his pocket, the Indianapolis Star reported.
In Utah, 11 anti-mask protestors were arrested on misdemeanor charges for allegedly disrupting a school board meeting in May, the Salt Lake Tribune reported. The protestors entered the school board meeting and shouted obscenities, which resulted in an early end to the meeting.

View: https://youtu.be/zxu3wdiXRF0
11:10 min

Senator Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) tweeted his thoughts:
"Parents are speaking out against Critical Race Theory in schools. Now the Biden administration is cracking down on dissent."


Just this week, Ron Paul explained why it is so important for parents to control the education of their children:
During last week’s Virginia gubernatorial debate, Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe promised that as governor he would prevent parents from removing sexually explicit books from school libraries, because he doesn't think “parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”
McAuliffe's disdain for parents who think they should have some say in their children’s education is shared by most “progressives,” as well as some who call themselves conservatives. They think parents should obediently pay the taxes to fund the government schools and never question any aspect of the government school program.
School officials' refusal to obey the wishes of parents extends to the anti-science mask mandates. Mask mandates are not only useless in protecting children from a virus they are at low risk of becoming sick from or transmitting, the mandated mask-wearing actually makes children sick! Yet school administrators refuse to follow the science if that means listening to parents instead of the so-called experts.
Replacing parental control with government control of education (and other aspects of child raising) has been a goal of authoritarians since Plato. After all, it is much easier to ensure obedience if someone has been raised to think of the government as the source of all wisdom and truth, as well as the provider of all of life’s necessities.
In contrast to an authoritarian society, a free society recognizes that parents have both the responsibility and the right to provide their children with a quality education that reflects the parents’ values.
Teachers who use their positions to indoctrinate children in beliefs that contradict the views of the parents are the ones overstepping their bounds.
Restoring parental control of education should be a priority for all who believe in liberty. If government can override the wishes of parents in the name of “education” or “protecting children’s health” then what area of our lives is safe from government intrusion?
Fortunately, growing dissatisfaction with government schools is leading many parents to try to change school policies.
"It is shameful that activists are weaponizing the US Department of Justice against parents,” Nicole Neily, president of Parents Defending Education told the Daily Caller News Foundation in response to the memorandum.

“This is a coordinated attempt to intimidate dissenting voices in the debates surrounding America’s underperforming K-12 education – and it will not succeed. We will not be silenced.”
 

Attachments

marsh

TB Fanatic

Trump slams DOJ plan to monitor parents fighting 'radical left school boards' over CRT in classrooms

Parents "have a voice as to how their children" are to be "brought up and educated," the former president reaffirmed.

By John Solomon
Updated: October 5, 2021 - 4:50pm

Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday denounced the Justice Department for asking the FBI to investigate parents who are pressuring school boards to stop teaching critical race theory, saying it was part of a larger leftist agenda to sideline moms and dads from having a say over their children's future.

https://rss.art19.com/episodes/9f45941d-845b-47d8-8467-fe17d4c212c0.mp3 27:07 min

"It's very tough because the parents are very wounded by what's taken place by, in many cases, radical left school boards," Trump said during an interview with Just the News on the John Solomon Reports podcast. "And you would certainly think they have a voice — and they have a voice — as to how their children are going to be educated, brought up and educated."

DOJ's instruction to the FBI amounts to a "very tough stance," the former president said during a wide-ranging interview. "There's no question about it. I heard that late last night. And I was somewhat surprised by it. But nothing surprises me too much anymore."

Trump also denounced the Biden administration for its failures in Afghanistan and on other foreign policy matters, saying China was taking advantage of American weakness by flying warplanes near Taiwan.

"I can guarantee you that if I were president, they would not have done it," said Trump. "They wouldn't be sending planes over right now. For four years you never heard anything. Taiwan wasn't even mentioned."

Trump
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Far Left Facebook Whistleblower: People Like Me Should Regulate Big Tech
1
WASHINGTON, DC - OCTOBER 5: Former Facebook employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen testifies during a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing entitled 'Protecting Kids Online: Testimony from a Facebook Whistleblower' on Capitol Hill on Capitol Hill, October 05, 2021 in Washington, DC. Haugen left Facebook in May and …
Pool/Getty
ALLUM BOKHARI5 Oct 2021833

Establishment media-backed Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before the Senate Commerce Committee today, telling lawmakers that they should set up a new regulatory agency to protect against the “harms” of Big Tech (including so-called disinformation and hate speech), and that people like her should get to run it.

According to Haugen, the only possible way to fix the evils of social media (at one point in the hearing, she appeared to blame Facebook for causing the events of January 6th), is to put people like her in charge of regulating it.

“Right now, the only people in the world who are trained to analyze these experiments, to understand what is happening inside of Facebook, are people who ‘grew up’ inside of Facebook, or Pinterest, or another social media company,” said Haugen.

WASHINGTON, DC – OCTOBER 05: Facebook whistleblower, Frances Haugen leaves after appearing before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Subcommittee during a hearing entitled ‘Protecting Kids Online: Testimony from a Facebook Whistleblower’ at the Russell Senate Office Building on October 05, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Matt McClain-Pool/Getty Images)

“And there needs to be a regulatory home where someone like me could do a tour of duty after working at a place like [Facebook], and have a place to work on things like regulation”
The Associated Press
Zuckerberg appears in Congress as Facebook faces scrutiny (The Associated Press)

Haugen also made it clear what she would do if she were given regulatory power over Facebook and other platforms — she would avoid giving users freedom of choice, in favor of a one-size-fits-all model.

During an exchange with Sen. John Thune (R-SD) Haugen said that users should not be given a choice over whether to disable Facebook’s allegedly “harmful” algorithms.

“I don’t think it’s just a question of saying, should people have the option of choosing to not be manipulated by their algorithms,” said Haugen “I think if we had appropriate oversight, or if we reformed 230 to make Facebook responsible for the consequences of their intentional ranking decisions, I think they would get rid of engagement based ranking.”

Note — “engagement-based ranking” is a system of ranking content according to how many people react or engage with it. Haugen considers this system, where the ranking of content is tied to people’s level of interest in it, to be a problem.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Senator Josh Hawley Calls Out DOJ For Trying to Sic FBI on Parents Livid at School Boards

By Larry Johnson
Published October 5, 2021 at 9:01pm

Senator Josh Hawley rose to the challenge today and excoriated Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco for Attorney General Garland Merrick’s order for the FBI and US Attorneys to investigate parents who “harass or intimidate” members of school boards.

View: https://youtu.be/xh5IQWaqZDs
5:41 min

If I did not know better I would be thinking that a secret cabal of Trump supporters are paying Biden and his team to propose one stupid, insane policy after another. This move by AG Merrick has nothing to do with actual attacks and threats against school administrators. It is pure politics:
Garland fired off his memo days after the National School Boards Association (NSBA) claimed in a letter to President Biden that “America’s public schools and its education leaders are under an immediate threat,” as parents grow frustrated with mask mandates being imposed on their children and critical race theory being injected into their curricula.
And this will enrage every parent with a brain in their head and love for their child. Tucker Carlson, as expected, stepped up to the plate and flayed the Biden Administration for this attempt to intimidate parents who keen to fight the encroaching communist ideology that is supplanting America’s traditions and values.

There is a silver lining–Biden’s repeated embrace of wrong-headed policies that assault the majority of Americans who still love this country is making Demented Joe more unpopular with each passing day.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis Goes After Corrupt AG Garland – Says “Florida Will Defend the Free Speech Rights of Its Citizens”

By Joe Hoft
Published October 5, 2021 at 6:45pm


Florida’s governor DeSantis won’t put up with a corrupt Biden Attorney General. He politely told AG Garland that Florida will stand up for the free speech rights of its people.

Last night Biden’s corrupt Attorney General instructed his political and corrupt FBI to go after concerned American parents who speak out against the racist critical race theory or the deadly COVID mandates in schools.

Biden’s gang is more like a communist or nazi regime than any prior Administration other than Obama’s. This is why many Americans believe Obama, George Soros or China, are running this fright fest.

Red State reported on Garland’s actions:
While Garland spoke about “threats,” he didn’t identify any threats or concerns which would qualify as federal criminal action requiring such interference in the parents’ rights to express themselves. Indeed, the announcement seemed like an effort to basically chill their rights to speak. Normally, if there was any actual “threat,” it would come within the purview of local law enforcement. There’s no requirement to make what would already be illegal more illegal. So what actually are they saying here? What’s actually happening with this edict from the Biden Administration?
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has championed the rights of parents to speak on behalf of their own children — something that should be self-evident and unquestionable — threw down the gauntlet, speaking out against this troubling announcement from Garland.
In response to Garland’s communist action, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis shared:

1633490441121.png

Biden’s gang stole the election and are willing to destroy our country to satisfy their power and greed.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

It Begins: Federal Investigators Are Issuing Warrants for Google to Turn Over Anyone Typing in Certain Search Terms

By Jim Hoft
Published October 5, 2021 at 4:33pm

It begins.

The federal government is issuing warrants from compliant Google to turn over anyone typing in certain search terms.


But they assure the American public that they can be trusted. Just like the federal government assured Americans they would not abuse the secret FISA courts to spy on innocent Americans!

We now know that crooked feds were spying on Donald Trump, his family, his campaign and his presidency using the secret courts to obtain warrants.

This is your brave new world. Get used to it.

Yahoo reported:
The U.S. government is reportedly secretly issuing warrants for Google to provide user data on anyone typing in certain search terms, raising fears that innocent online users could get caught up in serious crime investigations at a greater frequency than previously thought.
In an attempt to track down criminals, federal investigators have started using new “keyword warrants” and used them to ask Google to provide them information on anyone who searched a victim’s name or their address during a particular year, an accidentally unsealed court document that Forbes found shows.
Google has to respond to thousands of warrant orders each year, but the keyword warrants are a relatively new strategy used by the government and are controversial.
“Trawling through Google’s search history database enables police to identify people merely based on what they might have been thinking about, for whatever reason, at some point in the past,” Jennifer Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, told Forbes.
“This never-before-possible technique threatens First Amendment interests and will inevitably sweep up innocent people, especially if the keyword terms are not unique and the time frame not precise. To make matters worse, police are currently doing this in secret, which insulates the practice from public debate and regulation,” she added.
The government said that the scope of the warrants is limited to avoid implicating innocent people who happen to search for certain terms, but it’s not publicly disclosed how many users’ data are sent to the government and what the extent of the warrant requests are.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

AG Merrick Garland’s Daughter Married to Co-Founder of Education Company Selling Critical Race Theory Resource Material to School Districts

October 5, 2021 | Sundance | 102 Comments

Well, well, well… This is interesting. U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland recently instructed the FBI to begin investigating parents who confront school board administrators over Critical Race Theory indoctrination material. The U.S. Department of Justice issued a memorandum to the FBI instructing them to initiate investigations of any parent attending a local school board meeting who might be viewed as confrontational, intimidating or harassing.

Attorney General Merrick Garland’s daughter is Rebecca Garland. In 2018 Rebecca Garland married Xan Tanner [LINK]. Mr. Xan Tanner is the current co-founder of a controversial education service company called Panorama Education. [LINK and LINK] Panorama Education is the “social learning” resource material provider to school districts and teachers that teach Critical Race Theory.



Conflict of interest much?
Yes, the Attorney General is instructing the FBI to investigate parents who might pose a financial threat to the business of his daughter’s husband.
Screen-grabs and citations below:



(New York Times LINK)

1633494972716.png

(Panorama Education Services Link)

1633495063410.png

(Panorama, Social Learning Link)

1633495144248.png1633495196877.png

(DOJ Memo to FBI LINK)
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Whitehead: The Police State's Reign Of Terror Continues... With Help From The Supreme Court

WEDNESDAY, OCT 06, 2021 - 12:05 AM
Authored by John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead via The Rurtherford Institute,
“Rights aren’t rights if someone can take them away. They’re privileges.”
- George Carlin
You think you’ve got rights? Think again.

All of those freedoms we cherish—the ones enshrined in the Constitution, the ones that affirm our right to free speech and assembly, due process, privacy, bodily integrity, the right to not have police seize our property without a warrant, or search and detain us without probable cause—amount to nothing when the government and its agents are allowed to disregard those prohibitions on government overreach at will.


This is the grim reality of life in the American police state.

In fact, in the face of the government’s ongoing power grabs, our so-called rights have been reduced to mere technicalities, privileges that can be granted and taken away, all with the general blessing of the courts.

This is what one would call a slow death by a thousand cuts, only it’s the Constitution being inexorably bled to death by the very institution (the judicial branch of government) that is supposed to be protecting it (and us) from government abuse.

Court pundits, fixated on a handful of politically charged cases before the U.S. Supreme Court this term dealing with abortion, gun rights and COVID-19 mandates, have failed to recognize that the Supreme Court—and the courts in general—sold us out long ago.

With each passing day, it becomes increasingly clear that Americans can no longer rely on the courts to “take the government off the backs of the people,” in the words of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas. When presented with an opportunity to loosen the government’s noose that keeps getting cinched tighter and tighter around the necks of the American people, what does our current Supreme Court usually do?

It ducks. Prevaricates. Remains silent. Speaks to the narrowest possible concern.

More often than not, it gives the government and its corporate sponsors the benefit of the doubt, seemingly more concerned with establishing order and protecting government interests than with upholding the rights of the people enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

Rarely do the concerns of the populace prevail.

Every so often, the justices toss a bone to those who fear they have abdicated their allegiance to the Constitution. Too often, however, the Supreme Court tends to march in lockstep with the police state.

As a result, the police and other government agents have been generally empowered to probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance.

In recent years, for example, the Court has ruled that police officers can use lethal force in car chases without fear of lawsuits; police officers can stop cars based only on “anonymous” tips; Secret Service agents are not accountable for their actions, as long as they’re done in the name of “security”; citizens only have a right to remain silent if they assert it; police have free reign to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes,” justifying any and all police searches of vehicles stopped on the roadside; police can forcibly take your DNA, whether or not you’ve been convicted of a crime; police can stop, search, question and profile citizens and non-citizens alike; police can subject Americans to virtual strip searches, no matter the “offense”; police can break into homes without a warrant, even if it’s the wrong home; and it’s a crime to not identify yourself when a policeman asks your name.

Moreover, it was a unanimous Supreme Court which determined that police officers may use drug-sniffing dogs to conduct warrantless searches of cars during routine traffic stops. That same Court gave police the green light to taser defenseless motorists, strip search non-violent suspects arrested for minor incidents, and break down people’s front doors without evidence that they have done anything wrong.

The cases the Supreme Court refuses to hear, allowing lower court judgments to stand, are almost as critical as the ones they rule on. Some of these cases have delivered devastating blows to the rights enshrined in the Constitution.

By remaining silent, the Court has affirmed that: legally owning a firearm is enough to justify a no-knock raid by police; the military can arrest and detain American citizens; students can be subjected to random lockdowns and mass searches at school; police officers who don’t know their actions violate the law aren’t guilty of breaking the law; trouble understanding police orders constitutes resistance that justifies the use of excessive force; and the areas immediately adjacent to one’s apartment can be subjected to warrantless police surveillance and arrests.

Make no mistake about it: when such instances of abuse are continually validated by a judicial system that kowtows to every police demand, no matter how unjust, no matter how in opposition to the Constitution, one can only conclude that the system is rigged.

By refusing to accept any of the eight or so qualified immunity cases before it last year that strove to hold police accountable for official misconduct, the Supreme Court delivered a chilling reminder that in the American police state, “we the people” are at the mercy of law enforcement officers who have almost absolute discretion to decide who is a threat, what constitutes resistance, and how harshly they can deal with the citizens they were appointed to ‘serve and protect.”

This is how qualified immunity keeps the police state in power.

Lawyers tend to offer a lot of complicated, convoluted explanations for the doctrine of qualified immunity, which was intended to insulate government officials from frivolous lawsuits, but the real purpose of qualified immunity is to rig the system, ensuring that abusive agents of the government almost always win and the victims of government abuse almost always lose.

How else do you explain a doctrine that requires victims of police violence to prove that their abusers knew their behavior was illegal because it had been deemed so in a nearly identical case at some prior time?

It’s a setup for failure.

A review of critical court rulings over the past several decades, including rulings affirming qualified immunity protections for government agents by the U.S. Supreme Court, reveals a startling and steady trend towards pro-police state rulings by an institution concerned more with establishing order, protecting the ruling class, and insulating government agents from charges of wrongdoing than with upholding the rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Indeed, as Reuters reports, qualified immunity “has become a nearly failsafe tool to let police brutality go unpunished and deny victims their constitutional rights.”

Worse, as Reuters concluded, “the Supreme Court has built qualified immunity into an often insurmountable police defense by intervening in cases mostly to favor the police.”

For those in need of a reminder of all the ways in which the Supreme Court has made us sitting ducks at the mercy of the American police state, let me offer the following.

As a result of court rulings in recent years, police can claim qualified immunity for warrantless searches. Police can claim qualified immunity for warrantless arrests based on mere suspicion. Police can claim qualified immunity for using excessive force against protesters. Police can claim qualified immunity for shooting a fleeing suspect in the back. Police can claim qualified immunity for shooting a mentally impaired person. Police officers can use lethal force in car chases without fear of lawsuits. Police can stop, arrest and search citizens without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Police officers can stop cars based on “anonymous” tips or for “suspicious” behavior such as having a reclined car seat or driving too carefully. Police can forcibly take your DNA, whether or not you’ve been convicted of a crime. Police can use the “fear for my life” rationale as an excuse for shooting unarmed individuals. Police have free reign to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes.” Not only are police largely protected by qualified immunity, but police dogs are also off the hook for wrongdoing.

Police can subject Americans to strip searches, no matter the “offense.” Police can break into homes without a warrant, even if it’s the wrong home. Police can use knock-and-talk tactics as a means of sidestepping the Fourth Amendment. Police can carry out no-knock raids if they believe announcing themselves would be dangerous. Police can recklessly open fire on anyone that might be “armed.”

Police can destroy a home during a SWAT raid, even if the owner gives their consent to enter and search it. Police can suffocate someone, deliberately or inadvertently, in the process of subduing them.

To sum it up, we are dealing with a nationwide epidemic of court-sanctioned police violence carried out with impunity against individuals posing little or no real threat.

So where does that leave us?

For those deluded enough to believe that they’re living the American dream—where the government represents the people, where the people are equal in the eyes of the law, where the courts are arbiters of justice, where the police are keepers of the peace, and where the law is applied equally as a means of protecting the rights of the people—it’s time to wake up.

We no longer have a representative government, a rule of law, or justice.

Liberty has fallen to legalism. Freedom has fallen to fascism.

Justice has become jaded, jaundiced and just plain unjust.


And for too many, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the American dream of freedom and justice for all has turned into a living nightmare.

Given the turbulence of our age, with its government overreach, military training drills on American soil, domestic surveillance, SWAT team raids, asset forfeiture, wrongful convictions, profit-driven prisons, corporate corruption, COVID mandates, and community-wide lockdowns, the need for a guardian of the people’s rights has never been greater.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Greenwald: Democrats, Media Do Not Want To Weaken Facebook, Just Commandeer Its Power To Censor

TUESDAY, OCT 05, 2021 - 07:25 PM
Authored by Glenn Greenwald via Substack,

"Whistleblower" Frances Haugen is a vital media and political asset because she advances their quest for greater control over online political discourse...


Much is revealed by who is bestowed hero status by the corporate media. This week's anointed avatar of stunning courage is Frances Haugen, a former Facebook product manager being widely hailed as a "whistleblower” for providing internal corporate documents to the Wall Street Journal relating to the various harms which Facebook and its other platforms (Instagram and WhatsApp) are allegedly causing.

The social media giant hurts America and the world, this narrative maintains, by permitting misinformation to spread (presumably more so than cable outlets and mainstream newspapers do virtually every week); fostering body image neurosis in young girls through Instagram (presumably more so than fashion magazines, Hollywood and the music industry do with their glorification of young and perfectly-sculpted bodies); promoting polarizing political content in order to keep the citizenry enraged, balkanized and resentful and therefore more eager to stay engaged (presumably in contrast to corporate media outlets, which would never do such a thing); and, worst of all, by failing to sufficiently censor political content that contradicts liberal orthodoxies and diverges from decreed liberal Truth. On Tuesday, Haugen's star turn took her to Washington, where she spent the day testifying before the Senate about Facebook's dangerous refusal to censor even more content and ban even more users than they already do.

There is no doubt, at least to me, that Facebook and Google are both grave menaces. Through consolidation, mergers and purchases of any potential competitors, their power far exceeds what is compatible with a healthy democracy. A bipartisan consensus has emerged on the House Antitrust Committee that these two corporate giants — along with Amazon and Apple — are all classic monopolies in violation of long-standing but rarely enforced antitrust laws. Their control over multiple huge platforms that they purchased enables them to punish and even destroy competitors, as we saw when Apple, Google and Amazon united to remove Parler from the internet forty-eight hours after leading Democrats demanded that action, right as Parler became the most-downloaded app in the country, or as Google suppresses Rumble videos in its dominant search feature as punishment for competing with Google's YouTube platform. Facebook and Twitter both suppressed reporting on the authentic documents about Joe Biden's business activities reported by The New York Post just weeks before the 2020 election. These social media giants also united to effectively remove the sitting elected President of the United States from the internet, prompting grave warnings from leaders across the democratic world about how anti-democratic their consolidated censorship power has become.

But none of the swooning over this new Facebook heroine nor any of the other media assaults on Facebook have anything remotely to do with a concern over those genuine dangers. Congress has taken no steps to curb the influence of these Silicon Valley giants because Facebook and Google drown the establishment wings of both parties with enormous amounts of cash and pay well-connected lobbyists who are friends and former colleagues of key lawmakers to use their D.C. influence to block reform. With the exception of a few stalwarts, neither party's ruling wing really has any objection to this monopolistic power as long as it is exercised to advance their own interests.

And that is Facebook's only real political problem: not that they are too powerful but that they are not using that power to censor enough content from the internet that offends the sensibilities and beliefs of Democratic Party leaders and their liberal followers, who now control the White House, the entire executive branch and both houses of Congress. Haugen herself, now guided by long-time Obama operative Bill Burton, has made explicitly clear that her grievance with her former employer is its refusal to censor more of what she regards as “hate, violence and misinformation.” In a 60 Minutes interview on Sunday night, Haugen summarized her complaint about CEO Mark Zuckerberg this way: he “has allowed choices to be made where the side effects of those choices are that hateful and polarizing content gets more distribution and more reach." Haugen, gushed The New York Times’ censorship-desperate tech unit as she testified on Tuesday, is “calling for regulation of the technology and business model that amplifies hate and she’s not shy about comparing Facebook to tobacco.”

Agitating for more online censorship has been a leading priority for the Democratic Party ever since they blamed social media platforms (along with WikiLeaks, Russia, Jill Stein, James Comey, The New York Times, and Bernie Bros) for the 2016 defeat of the rightful heir to the White House throne, Hillary Clinton.

And this craving for censorship has been elevated into an even more urgent priority for their corporate media allies, due to the same belief that Facebook helped elect Trump but also because free speech on social media prevents them from maintaining a stranglehold on the flow of information by allowing ordinary, uncredentialed serfs to challenge, question and dispute their decrees or build a large audience that they cannot control. Destroying alternatives to their failing platforms is thus a means of self-preservation: realizing that they cannot convince audiences to trust their work or pay attention to it, they seek instead to create captive audiences by destroying or at least controlling any competitors to their pieties.

As I have been reporting for more than a year, Democrats do not make any secret of their intent to co-opt Silicon Valley power to police political discourse and silence their enemies. Congressional Democrats have summoned the CEO's of Google, Facebook and Twitter four times in the last year to demand they censor more political speech. At the last Congressional inquisition in March, one Democrat after the next explicitly threatened the companies with legal and regulatory reprisals if they did not immediately start censoring more.

A Pew survey from August shows that Democrats now overwhelmingly support internet censorship not only by tech giants but also by the government which their party now controls. In the name of "restricting misinformation,” more than 3/4 of Democrats want tech companies "to restrict false info online, even if it limits freedom of information,” and just under 2/3 of Democrats want the U.S. Government to control that flow of information over the internet:



The prevailing pro-censorship mindset of the Democratic Party is reflected not only by that definitive polling data but also by the increasingly brash and explicit statements of their leaders. At the end of 2020, Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA), newly elected after young leftist activists worked tirelessly on his behalf to fend off a primary challenge from the more centrist Rep. Joseph Kennedy III (D-MA), told Facebook's Zuckerberg exactly what the Democratic Party wanted. In sum, they demand more censorship:

View: https://youtu.be/CcK0XEAzF04
.11 min

This, and this alone, is the sole reason why there is so much adoration being constructed around the cult of this new disgruntled Facebook employee. What she provides, above all else, is a telegenic and seemingly informed “insider” face to tell Americans that Facebook is destroying their country and their world by allowing too much content to go uncensored, by permitting too many conversations among ordinary people that are, in the immortal worlds of the NYT's tech reporter Taylor Lorenz, “unfettered.”

When Facebook, Google, Twitter and other Silicon Valley social media companies were created, they did not set out to become the nation's discourse police. Indeed, they affirmatively wanted not to do that. Their desire to avoid that role was due in part to the prevailing libertarian ideology of a free internet in that sub-culture. But it was also due to self-interest: the last thing social media companies wanted to be doing is looking for ways to remove and block people from using their product and, worse, inserting themselves into the middle of inflammatory political controversies. Corporations seek to avoid angering potential customers and users over political stances, not courting that anger.

This censorship role was not one they so much sought as one that was foisted on them. It was not really until the 2016 election, when Democrats were obsessed with blaming social media giants (and pretty much everyone else except themselves) for their humiliating defeat, that pressure began escalating on these executives to start deleting content liberals deemed dangerous or false and banning their adversaries from using the platforms at all. As it always does, the censorship began by targeting widely disliked figures — Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones and others deemed “dangerous” — so that few complained (and those who did could be vilified as sympathizers of the early offenders). Once entrenched, the censorship net then predictably and rapidly spread inward (as it invariably does) to encompass all sorts of anti-establishment dissidents on the right, the left, and everything in between. And no matter how much it widens, the complaints that it is not enough intensify. For those with the mentality of a censor, there can never be enough repression of dissent. And this plot to escalate censorship pressures found the perfect vessel in this stunningly brave and noble Facebook heretic who emerged this week from the shadows into the glaring spotlight. She became a cudgel that Washington politicians and their media allies could use to beat Facebook into submission to their censorship demands.


Part 1 of 2
 

marsh

TB Fanatic
Part 2 of 2

In this dynamic we find what the tech and culture writer Curtis Yarvin calls "power leak.” This is a crucial concept for understanding how power is exercised in American oligarchy, and Yarvin's brilliant essay illuminates this reality as well as it can be described. Hyperbolically arguing that "Mark Zuckerberg has no power at all,” Yarvin points out that it may appear that the billionaire Facebook CEO is powerful because he can decide what will and will not be heard on the largest information distribution platform in the world. But in reality, Zuckerberg is no more powerful than the low-paid content moderators whom Facebook employs to hit the "delete” or "ban” button, since it is neither the Facebook moderators nor Zuckerberg himself who is truly making these decisions. They are just censoring as they are told, in obedience to rules handed down from on high. It is the corporate press and powerful Washington elites who are coercing Facebook and Google to censor in accordance with their wishes and ideology upon pain of punishment in the form of shame, stigma and even official legal and regulatory retaliation. Yarvin puts it this way:
However, if Zuck is subject to some kind of oligarchic power, he is in exactly the same position as his own moderators. He exercises power, but it is not his power, because it is not his will. The power does not flow from him; it flows through him. This is why we can say honestly and seriously that he has no power. It is not his, but someone else’s. . . .
Zuck doesn’t want to do any of this. Nor do his users particularly want it. Rather, he is doing it because he is under pressure from the press.
Duh. He cannot even admit that he is under duress—or his Vietcong guards might just snap, and shoot him like the Western running-dog capitalist he is….
And what grants the press this terrifying power? The pure and beautiful power of the logos? What distinguishes a well-written poast, like this one, from an equally well-written Times op-ed? Nothing at all but prestige. In normal times, every sane CEO will comply unhesitatingly with the slightest whim of the legitimate press, just as they will comply unhesitatingly with a court order. That’s just how it is. To not call this power government is—just playing with words.
As I have written before, this problem — whereby the government coerces private actors to censor for them — is not one that Yarvin was the first to recognize. The U.S. Supreme Court has held, since at least 1963, that the First Amendment's "free speech” clause is violated when state officials issue enough threats and other forms of pressure that essentially leave the private actor with no real choice but to censor in accordance with the demands of state officials. Whether we are legally at the point where that constitutional line has been crossed by the increasingly blunt bullying tactics of Democratic lawmakers and executive branch officials is a question likely to be resolved in the courts. But whatever else is true, this pressure is very real and stark and reveals that the real goal of Democrats is not to weaken Facebook but to capture its vast power for their own nefarious ends.

There is another issue raised by this week's events that requires ample caution as well. The canonized Facebook whistleblower and her journalist supporters are claiming that what Facebook fears most is repeal or reform of Section 230, the legislative provision that provides immunity to social media companies for defamatory or other harmful material published by their users. That section means that if a Facebook user or YouTube host publishes legally actionable content, the social media companies themselves cannot be held liable. There may be ways to reform Section 230 that can reduce the incentive to impose censorship, such as denying that valuable protection to any platform that censors, instead making it available only to those who truly allow an unmoderated platform to thrive. But such a proposal has little support in Washington. What is far more likely is that Section 230 will be "modified” to impose greater content moderation obligations on all social media companies.

Far from threatening Facebook and Google, such a legal change could be the greatest gift one can give them, which is why their executives are often seen calling on Congress to regulate the social media industry. Any legal scheme that requires every post and comment to be moderated would demand enormous resources — gigantic teams of paid experts and consultants to assess "misinformation” and "hate speech” and veritable armies of employees to carry out their decrees. Only the established giants such as Facebook and Google would be able to comply with such a regimen, while other competitors — including large but still-smaller ones such as Twitter — would drown in those requirements. And still-smaller challengers to the hegemony of Facebook and Google, such as Substack and Rumble, could never survive. In other words, any attempt by Congress to impose greater content moderation obligations — which is exactly what they are threatening — would destroy whatever possibility remains for competitors to arise and would, in particular, destroy any platforms seeking to protect free discourse. That would be the consequence by design, which is why one should be very wary of any attempt to pretend that Facebook and Google fear such legislative adjustments.

There are real dangers posed by allowing companies such as Facebook and Google to amass the power they have now consolidated. But very little of the activism and anger from the media and Washington toward these companies is designed to fracture or limit that power. It is designed, instead, to transfer that power to other authorities who can then wield it for their own interests. The only thing more alarming than Facebook and Google controlling and policing our political discourse is allowing elites from one of the political parties in Washington and their corporate media outlets to assume the role of overseer, as they are absolutely committed to doing. Far from being some noble whistleblower, Frances Haugen is just their latest tool to exploit for their scheme to use the power of social media giants to control political discourse in accordance with their own views and interests.

Correction, Oct. 5, 2021, 5:59 pm ET: This article was edited to reflect that just under 2/3 of Democrats favor U.S. Government censorship of the internet in the name of fighting misinformation, not just over.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

'Totalitarian tyranny': Parents groups slam AG Garland for turning FBI on their activism

Attorney general has personal connection to Panorama Education, a firm that data mines children without parental consent and has allegedly evaded federal law DOJ is responsible for enforcing.

Updated: October 5, 2021 - 11:20pm

Parents who protest public school policies on race, gender and COVID-19 are crying foul after Attorney General Merrick Garland promised to "discourage" and prosecute "harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence" against school boards, administrators, teachers and staff.

His "mobilization of [the] FBI against parents is consistent with the complete weaponization of the federal government against ideological opponents," Rhode Island mother Nicole Solas, who is waging a public records battle with her school district over race-related curriculum, told Just the News.

"It ought to be the parents that need protection" from intimidation by school boards and superintendents, civil rights veteran Bob Woodson told Just the News. He cited Virginia Democratic gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe's recent statement that parents shouldn't tell schools what to teach.

"Nobody's making a case that lawlessness is being tolerated," said the founder of the Woodson Center and its 1776 Unites project, which advises school boards on history curricula and publishes its own lessons. The Department of Justice is creating the impression that parents are "firebombing school board meetings."

Former President Donald Trump told the John Solomon Reports podcast he was "somewhat surprised" by Garland's move, though "nothing surprises me too much anymore." He said parents were "very wounded by what's taken place by, in many cases, radical left school boards."

Garland's Monday night memo said the FBI and U.S. attorneys would convene meetings with federal, state and local leaders to discuss "strategies for addressing threats."

DOJ said in a press release that it would create "specialized training" for school boards and administrators to identify threats, report it to law enforcement and "capture and preserve evidence" to aid in prosecutions.

A task force is also planned that includes the department's Criminal Division and National Security Division. It will determine how to prosecute these crimes and assist state and local law enforcement "where threats of violence may not constitute federal crimes," the agency said.

The federal response closely follows a letter from the National School Boards Association (NSBA) claiming to face "domestic terrorism and hate crimes" from critics of mask mandates and promoters of "propaganda purporting the false inclusion of critical race theory" in classes.

It cited incidents including a man who "yelled a Nazi salute" in a Michigan school board meeting, though WDIV reported he was comparing supporters of mask mandates to Adolf Hitler. The man's employer told Detroit Metro Times it fired him after the incident.

"These incidents are beyond random acts," CEO Chip Slaven told Education Week. "What we are now seeing is a pattern of threats and violence occurring across state lines and via online platforms." The NSBA letter cites "interstate commerce" to justify federal intervention.

View: https://youtu.be/iQ62Xv25PoM
2:00 min

A coalition of parent activist groups led by D.C.-area Parents Defending Education (PDE) told the NSBA it used "a tiny number of minor incidents in order to insinuate" that parent-led protests against secrecy, race essentialism and "pandemic-related learning losses" are punishable under the Patriot Act.

"The association of legitimate protest with terrorism and violence reveals both your contempt for parents and your unwillingness to understand and hear the sincere cries of parents on behalf of their children," said the signatories, who claim to represent more than 400,000 members.

"We will not be bullied," they said. "We will not have our speech chilled."

"Civic participation is not domestic terrorism," Wenyuan Wu of signatory Californians for Equal Rights Foundation tweeted.

The Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism asked Garland to ensure "any measures taken by the federal government will be fully authorized, appropriately tailored, and consistent with the broad civil and constitutional liberties" owed activists.

"[W]e are confident that state and local law enforcement will use their legal authority to address" unlawful conduct, the membership group, which includes prominent black intellectuals John McWhorter and Glenn Loury, wrote in a letter. It said the "overwhelming majority" of concerned parents "are engaged in peaceful and lawful conduct."

File
Letter to AG re Oct 4 memo.pdf
PDE is now promoting a grassroots email campaign asking DOJ to drop its effort to "criminalize" advocacy for "high-quality education." It's also taking the fight to Garland by highlighting his own alleged conflict of interest.

The attorney general has a personal connection to a firm hired by Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) to "data mine kids" without parental consent, according to PDE's investigative chief, former Wall Street Journal correspondent Asra Nomani.

FCPS confirmed to Nomani that it classified Panorama Education, which counts Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg as an investor, as "school officials" to qualify for an exemption from the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

"Panorama Education will profit from Garland's outrageous silencing of parents who are challenging its data mining of K-12 students," Nomani wrote Tuesday. "This is federal law [FERPA] that Garland would have to enforce and Big Tech is now circumventing."

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1443831824720056320
4:40 min

Wealthy Northern Virginia has faced some of the most heated debates at public meetings in recent months. The Loudoun County School Board shut down public comments and cleared the room in the face of protests about a gender identity policy and critical race theory (CRT).

Woodson criticized the county for threatening to fire any school personnel "that even complaints" about CRT. It's like stopping a tenant from complaining about how the owner is maintaining the apartment, he said.

"This is all in protection of the school bureaucracies" and hand in hand with unions to turn "children into combatants," he told Just the News. "Most of the intimidation and the hostility toward civic order is coming from the school system."

The Southeastern Legal Foundation (SLF), which is representing Missouri teachers challenging "equity training," tweeted that NSBA was "equating parents and teachers like our clients with terrorists."

SLF general counsel Kimberly Hermann told Just the News the DOJ memo targets litigants as well as participants in school board meetings. "The Biden administration's use of the awesome power of government to investigate, stifle, and silence criticism is the hallmark of totalitarian tyranny," she wrote in an email.

Critics of the Garland memo and DOJ statement emphasized the feds didn't cite specific incidents of threats or violence, suggesting First Amendment activities were fair game for investigations and prosecutions.

"They went from 'critical race theory doesn't exist' to 'unleash the FBI against its enemies' in less than 90 days," tweeted Christopher Rufo, the activist behind several disclosures of school and corporate race training.

While Garland said he wouldn't target "spirited debate about policy matters," the agency didn't respond to a request from Just the News to specify examples of incidents it would prosecute, such as the Nazi salute in Michigan.
 
Last edited:

marsh

TB Fanatic

A Reverse Critical Theory
Posted by THE EDITORS on OCTOBER 4, 2021
Submitted by withered rose

Critical Theory is an ingenious piece of technology. Through Critical Theory (CT), disparate flavors of leftism—be it liberalism, social democracy, socialism, or anarchism—are united against the threat of racism. By interpreting all phenomena as either racist or anti-racist, CT can unite the anti-racists, no matter how much they may disagree amongst themselves, against the racists. If liberal disagrees with an anarchist who wants to shut down the bank account of a prominent conservative, perhaps because he does not believe in weaponizing private industry against political opposition, then that liberal is quickly identified as siding with the racists and is either ideologically purged (“cancel culture” is the cutesy way of saying just this) or is forced to hold to the party line. Through this technology, a divided left is able to unify as a single force and crush its opposition.

Unlike the left, the right is seemingly unable to put aside its differences for the sake of defeating the godless left.Conservatives, libertarians, nationalists and reactionaries cannot stop bickering amongst themselves despite a left that has taken institutional power and will stop at nothing to ensure that a Republican is never elected again. What is needed, if any semblance of America is to survive the leftist onslaught, is a right-wing equivalent to CT. So long as we render ourselves defenseless by opting to argue with one another, the left will flood the country with tens of millions of new Democratic voters, “fortify” our elections, make the chemical castration of children more available under the guise of “sex change surgery”, and de-platform what few men of the right remain on mainstream social media. It is either “join or die”, as Benjamin Franklin so aptly put.

If there is to be a technology for unifying the American right, it needs to accord with conservatives, libertarians, nationalists, and reactionaries. Common to each of these camps is the demographic: the American right, now matter how moderate or radical, consists of the middle class, those persons who own businesses, land, and are materially invested in their communities. Although there are exceptions, the American right is made up of white Christians and it is this demographic that inhabits the middle-class. The left, in contrast, are either upper-class oligarchs or are the lower-class foot soldiers of this oligarchy. It is this class distinction between right and left that will serve as the core for a reverse CT.

A Reverse Critical Theory

Since the 18th century politics has been the story of oligarchs stirring up the lower-class in an attempt to confiscate the wealth of the middle-class; politics has been the story of a high-low alliance against the middle. To conduct this looting operation the oligarchs, make appeals to justice, framing the middle-class as agents of sin that cannot be trusted with power, and thus gives a moral façade to the looting. In recent years this can be seen clearly with movements like “Defund the Police.” First, a middle-class segment is identified, in this case local and state police, whom the oligarchs want to loot and transfer the power of the middle to themselves. To do this the oligarchs enraged the lower-class, in this case BLM and Antifa, over supposed racism. Once the mass of the lower-class became convinced that local and state police were inherently racist, and, correspondingly, the middle-class became too afraid of the lower-class to voice opposition, then the oligarchs could introduce the slogan “Defund the Police.”

What defunding the police would do is de-power local and state police, and, in turn, granting federal enforcement agencies, who are (for the most part) in the pocket of the oligarchs. “Racism”, as can be seen here, is nothing more than a convenient moral cloak to hide the upper-class’ desire to enfranchise those members of law enforcement under their control, while simultaneously disenfranchising those members of law enforcement under their control. By calling the police “racist”, the left is really saying “these people are middle-class and are not under beholden to our dictates…let’s burn them at the stake!”

When a church is deemed “homophobic” for not performing a gay wedding, or when a couple does not allow their child to be chemically castrated (transition surgery) and is accordingly branded as “abusive” or “transphobic”, what is really happening is, like the example with Defund the Police, the high and low conspiring against the middle. Our oligarchs might not even care about the LGBT community, but by smearing churches and families who do not agree with LGBT, and then calling for these churches to lose tax exempt status or for the parents to lose custody of their child, they disempower two key sources of middle-class power: churches and families. Whether an oligarch cares about LGBT issues or not, he will inevitably pursue this line of action because it grants him more power over the lives of the middle-class and, simultaneously, strips them of their power.

Whenever a leftist says “racism”, “sexism”, “homophobe”, or “transphobe”, know that they are trying to cloak their intention to rob the wealth and power of the middle-class. There is a word for this behavior: criminality. Though we may want to believe otherwise, the left is not a rival political group, they are criminals who will try and moralize their theft one way or another. Apologizing to criminals, crying “please don’t hurt me, I’m not racist”, is either cowardice or compliancy with crime. It does not matter if you are a conservative or a libertarian, a nationalist or a reactionary, the left wants to steal your wealth and take away your power. The American right, also known as the middle-class, if it wants to survive, needs to put an end to criminality disguised as politics, call these goons out, and do everything possible to exclude them from any further political decision-making process. Those on the right who disagree with this are either cowards who have no place in politics or are apologists for criminals, either way there is no legitimate opposition to taking power away from the left and ensuring that they cannot take power ever again.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

EPIC: 427,000 Parents Respond to National School Board Association Labeling Them 'Domestic Terrorists'

BY GWENDOLYN SIMS OCT 05, 2021 6:49 PM ET


AP Photo/Denis Poroy

Last week, PJ Media covered the hysterical and threatening letter written by National School Boards Association (NSBA) president Viola Garcia. In the letter sent to none other than President Joe Biden, Garcia accused America’s concerned parents of threats, intimidation, and even “hate crimes” rising to the level of “domestic terrorism” for having the gall to speak up at their local school board meetings. The NSBA also requested “federal assistance to stop threats and acts of violence against school board members, school officials, and teachers.”

This week, however, the leaders of almost two dozen parent organizations fired back with a scathing letter of their own—and it is epic. The letter, written on behalf of members of several parent organizations, made clear that the NSBA’s claims of “hate” and “terrorism” were shameful:

NSBA cites a tiny number of minor incidents in order to insinuate that parents who are criticizing and protesting the decisions of school boards are engaging in, or may be engaging in, “domestic terrorism and hate crimes.” NSBA even invokes the PATRIOT Act. The association of legitimate protest with terrorism and violence reveals both your contempt for parents and your unwillingness to understand and hear the sincere cries of parents on behalf of their children. To equate parents with terrorists dishonors the thousands of victims of actual terrorism around the world. Have you no shame?
The parent organizations pointed out that the NSBA’s call for the federal government to use its power against parents was in itself a menacing and “thinly veiled threat, intended to intimidate into silence and submission the very constituents that [the NSBA] members ostensibly represent.” I mean, what else would you call asking the president to sic the Department of Justice, the FBI, Homeland Security, the Secret Service Assessment Center, and the Postal Service on America’s parents?

By contrast, America’s parent organizations “unequivocally oppose violence” and are made up of, not “domestic terrorists,” but “concerned citizens who care deeply about their community’s children – and who are concerned by the direction that America’s schools have taken.” It’s no secret many parents across the country are angry with what is happening (or not happening) in our taxpayer-funded schools:

Citizens are angry that school boards and school officials around the country are restricting access to public meetings, limiting public comment, and in some cases conducting business via text messages in violation of state open meetings laws.
They are angry that schools are charging them thousands of dollars in public records requests to view curriculum and training materials that impact their children and that should be open to the public by default.
They are angry that pandemic-related learning losses have compounded the already-low reading, writing, and math proficiency rates in America’s schools.
Parents are ultimately angry that rather than working to improve student achievement so our children actually learn in our country’s schools, “large numbers of districts have chosen to fund, often with hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayer money, ‘social justice’ and ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ programs with finite resources.”

It is very revealing that instead of listening to and addressing the concerns of parents, the NSBA chose “to smear their constituents rather than engage with them in good faith.” The concerns of parents are, of course, due to the leftist policies embraced and implemented by the school boards that are supposedly accountable to the parents of their respective districts.

“It is appalling that [NSBA] would choose to threaten your fellow Americans for having the courage to hold you accountable for your failures,” said the parent organizations. “We will not be bullied. We will not have our speech chilled. We have a constitutional right to petition our elected officials, and we will continue to do so” in order to “address and improve the quality of America’s public education system for all children.”

Bravo to America’s “parents, grandparents, and concerned citizens” for not being intimidated by the NSBA’s shameful tactics and for putting America’s children first in the face of blatant leftist bullying.
 

155 arty

Veteran Member

AG Merrick Garland’s Daughter Married to Co-Founder of Education Company Selling Critical Race Theory Resource Material to School Districts
October 5, 2021 | Sundance | 102 Comments

Well, well, well… This is interesting. U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland recently instructed the FBI to begin investigating parents who confront school board administrators over Critical Race Theory indoctrination material. The U.S. Department of Justice issued a memorandum to the FBI instructing them to initiate investigations of any parent attending a local school board meeting who might be viewed as confrontational, intimidating or harassing.

Attorney General Merrick Garland’s daughter is Rebecca Garland. In 2018 Rebecca Garland married Xan Tanner [LINK]. Mr. Xan Tanner is the current co-founder of a controversial education service company called Panorama Education. [LINK and LINK] Panorama Education is the “social learning” resource material provider to school districts and teachers that teach Critical Race Theory.



Conflict of interest much?
Yes, the Attorney General is instructing the FBI to investigate parents who might pose a financial threat to the business of his daughter’s husband.
Screen-grabs and citations below:



(New York Times LINK)

View attachment 294300

(Panorama Education Services Link)

View attachment 294301

(Panorama, Social Learning Link)

View attachment 294302View attachment 294303

(DOJ Memo to FBI LINK)
well ,so the shoe does fit!!!
 

Catnip

Veteran Member
[Marsh has been adding multiple posts that will scare the living snot out of you. You really need to spin through all her posts. Make sure you’re strapped-in though. You’ll be in a white-hot fury by the time you read them all - Dennis]



Leftists Call For New "Secret Police" Force To Spy On Trump Supporters

WEDNESDAY, JAN 20, 2021 - 18:45
Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

Perhaps channeling the spirit of the Soviet NKVD, leftists are now literally calling for a new “secret police” unit to be created at the federal level to spy on Trump supporters.


In an article published by the Daily Beast, Jeff Stein argues that existing federal agencies like the FBI are ill-equipped to stop “white terror” because they missed signs of the the pre-planning of the Capitol building siege.

The solution is to create a new “secret police” (yes, he literally uses those words) in order to “infiltrate and neutralize armed domestic extremists,” which according to the media’s latest narrative potentially includes 70 million Trump voters.

Stein even compares the Capitol breach to 9/11, an attack that killed nearly 3,000 people, and argues that a similar response to that should be directly inwardly against American citizens directed by a new “domestic spy agency.”

“One response to the 9/11 tragedy may well get renewed attention after the Capitol assault—especially if armed white nationalists are successful in carrying out more attacks in the coming days and weeks: The call for a secret police,” he writes.

The existence of a “secret police” force that subverts constitutional norms to repress the population is of course a hallmark of all dictatorial regimes, but that doesn’t appear to bother self-proclaimed “progressives.”

He also hits the nail on the head about the real reason why the creation of a new secret police unit would be necessary.

As we highlighted yesterday, in addition to a new secret police, some are calling for the creation of a Stasi-like citizen spy network that would recruit Biden supporters to spy on Trump supporters and grass them up to the authorities.

Presumably, this is all part of the national “healing” and “unity” that Joe Biden has called for.
... the federal agencies like the FBI are ill-equipped to stop “white terror” because they missed signs of the pre-planning of the Capitol building siege.

Well, duh, they missed those signs on purpose because it was planned by Pelosi, et al! According to some reports I read at the time, her laptop was taken in that "raid" and the "Jan. 6 Insurrection" plan to blame Trump supporters (as well as Trump, her arch-enemy) was on her laptop. Now to save face, the FBI says the "Insurrection" was not planned by Trump supporters. Too bad they didn't say who really was to blame aside from Pelosi, et al: BLM, the democrat's private army.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

AG Garland Threatens Parents Who Criticize Critical Race Theory (CRT) – His Son-In-Law Sells CRT Books to Schools

By Joe Hoft
Published October 6, 2021 at 1:00pm

Biden’s corrupt Attorney General, Merrick Garland, announced he was going to target parents around the country who oppose the critical race theory (CRT) and were speaking up about it at local school board meetings.

CRT promotes anti-white racism. It turns out the AG’s son-in-law is making lots of money selling the books schools use to teach about the racist theory.


Last night the Conservative Treehouse reported on the connection between the AG and CRT teachings in schools:
U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland recently instructed the FBI to begin investigating parents who confront school board administrators over Critical Race Theory indoctrination material. The U.S. Department of Justice issued a memorandum to the FBI instructing them to initiate investigations of any parent attending a local school board meeting who might be viewed as confrontational, intimidating or harassing.

Attorney General Merrick Garland’s daughter is Rebecca Garland. In 2018 Rebecca Garland married Xan Tanner [LINK]. Mr. Xan Tanner is the current co-founder of a controversial education service company called Panorama Education. [LINK and LINK] Panorama Education is the “social learning” resource material provider to school districts and teachers that teach Critical Race Theory.
FOX News reported on the connection between Garland and his son-in-law’s sales of CRT books this morning. Also, not to miss the Zuckerberg connection to Panorama.
Attorney General Merrick Garland is facing fresh scrutiny for his ties to a company that promotes the type of content parents are opposing in their ongoing battle with local school boards – a hot-button issue that Garland has recently targeted for investigation at the national level.
“Merrick Garland has declared a war on parents,” Asra Nomani of Parents Defending Education (PDE) tweeted Tuesday. “His daughter is married to the cofounder of @PanoramaEd which is under fire for its multimillion contracts with school boards. At @DefendingEd, parents sent us tips. We raised the alarm. Now Garland is trying to silence parents.”
As she noted, The New York Times reported in 2018 that Garland’s daughter Rebecca had married Panorama co-founder Xan Tanner.
Panorama’s ties to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg have also inspired skepticism as his company has come under fire for the way it uses data and impacts users’ psychological health.
Corrupt AG Garland should resign in shame.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Rep. Madison Cawthorne Calls Out Radical Democrat “Whistleblower” Frances Haugen Who WANTS More Censorship, More Control and Less Freedom (VIDEO)

By Jim Hoft
Published October 6, 2021 at 1:00pm



On Tuesday Facebook “whistleblower” and Democrat donor Frances Haugen went before a Senate subcommittee this week two days after appearing on “60 Minutes” to push for more tech control of free speech as they see fit.

Facebook, Google-YouTube, and Twitter have been eliminating conservative voices on their platform for years. Even President Trump was banned from Facebook after their fake news reports that he organized an “insurrection” at the US Capitol on Jan. 6th.

According to FOX News, Haugen has donated 37 times and given nearly $2,000 to Democrats and related PACs since 2016 while being employed at Facebook, Pinterest, and Gigster, according to Federal Election Commission records.
On Wednesday morning, Rep. Madison Cawthorne (R-NC) joined Stuart Varney on Varney and Co. to discuss Facebook and the peculiar “whistleblower” Frances Haugen.

Cawthorne told Stuart he is concerned with this so-called whistleblower who is demanding more censorship on conservatives.
Rep. Madison Cawthorne: This whistleblower who they had come up to Capitol Hill went out on 60 Minutes just on Sunday and then 48 hours she ended up in front of Congress? let me tell you, that’s the fastest I’ve ever seen Congress move. I believe that she is actually there to try and advocate for more censorship and less freedom of speech.
Because this is an anti-competition marketplace for Facebook as long as there are more regulations.
Rep. Cawthorne is correct. She was just another far left hack pushing for less freedom in America. She wasn’t even a good pretender.

Via Varney and Co.

Rumble video on website 2:40 min
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Brave Parents Fire Back at DOJ and National School Board Association After Categorizing them “Domestic Terrorists” – Accuses Garland of Conflict of Interest (VIDEO)

By Jim Hoft
Published October 6, 2021 at 8:05am


The growing backlash at school board meetings from outraged parents who use their constitutionally protected rights to speak out against tyrannical covid mandates and the poisonous, anti-American critical race theory that is being taught to their children has prompted the National School Boards Association to send a letter to Biden.

NSBA begged Biden to use federal law enforcement agencies against parents and investigate them for “domestic terrorism and hate crime threats.” They shamelessly claim the situation is so dire that he should use the Patriot Act, among other “enforceable actions” against them.

The Parents Defending Education Organization that has 427,000 members from several parents organizations, has responded and released an epic joint letter to NSBA. The letter, written on behalf of its members, made clear that the NSBA’s claims of “hate” and “terrorism” were shameful and it is a “thinly veiled threat, intended to intimidate into silence and submission the very constituents that your members ostensibly represent.”

Here’s an excerpt from the letter:

Citizens are angry that school boards and school officials around the country are restricting access to public meetings, limiting public comment, and in some cases conducting business via text messages in violation of state open meetings laws. They are angry that schools are charging them thousands of dollars in public records requests to view curriculum and training materials that impact their children and that should be open to the public by default. They are angry that pandemic-related learning losses have compounded the already-low reading, writing, and math proficiency rates in America’s schools. They are angry that rather than focusing on declining student achievement, large numbers of districts have chosen to fund, often with hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayer money, “social justice” and “diversity, equity, and inclusion” programs with finite resources.
Your members refuse to listen to these concerns – and your association has chosen to smear their constituents rather than engage with them in good faith. It is appalling that you would choose to threaten your fellow Americans for having the courage to hold you accountable for your failures.
We will not be bullied. We will not have our speech chilled. We have a constitutional right to petition our elected officials, and we will continue to do so.
We ask that your organization – and your members – engage respectfully and constructively with the country’s parents, grandparents, and concerned citizens so that we might work together to address and improve the quality of America’s public education system for all children.
Asra Nomani, vice president of investigations and strategy at Parents Defending Education, changed her Twitter handle by adding “Domestic Terrorist” to her name. She then posted a video where she accused Biden’s DOJ of criminalizing parenting, and they owe the people of America a swift apology.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1443831824720056320
4:40 min

Asra Nomani went on and accused Merrick Garland of conflict of interest. His daughter is married to the co-founder of Panorama Education which is criticized for its multimillion contracts with school boards. According to its website, Panorama provides classroom-level, school-level, and district-level reports that provide teachers and school leaders with individualized data they can use to improve their support for students’ academic, social, and emotional learning.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1445376473502715911
3:22 min

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1445378912628924419
.41 min
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Florida Gov. DeSantis Promises To Defend Parents At School Board Meetings Against DOJ

WEDNESDAY, OCT 06, 2021 - 02:07 PM
Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

Following a Department of Justice announcement Monday that it would direct the FBI to mobilize against parents who allegedly threaten teachers and school board members, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis promised that the state would defend parents amid GOP outcry against the move.
“Attorney General Garland is weaponizing the DOJ by using the FBI to pursue concerned parents and silence them through intimidation,” DeSantis wrote.
“Florida will defend the free speech rights of its citizens and will not allow federal agents to squelch dissent.”
The Justice Department stated that it would create a task force to see how the federal government can be used to prosecute any criminal conduct toward teachers or how to assist state and local authorities investigate such threats. It came after a national association of school boards asked the Biden administration to use “extraordinary measures” to prevent alleged threats against school board staff, accusing parents who oppose teaching critical race theory and mask mandates of lodging them.



DeSantis’s office on Tuesday released a statement saying Florida law already prohibits harassment of teachers, while adding that Florida law enforcement is “perfectly capable of responding to crimes in Florida, and we have never heard the FBI suggest otherwise.”
“However, disagreement is not harassment. Protest is not terrorism, unless it involves rioting, looting, and assault, like some of the left-wing protests of summer 2020. Again, all of those actions are crimes in Florida and will be prosecuted, regardless of political context,” the statement added.
According to the Justice Department, it will create a task force to determine how to use federal resources to prosecute offending parents along with how to provide advice to states where no federal laws have been broken. Training will also be provided to school staff members on how to report threats from parents.

During school board meetings across the United States over the past several months, heated discussions have been held by parents, teachers, and school board staff on whether critical race theory or associated ideologies should be taught to children. The Department of Justice’s announcement did not elaborate on whether threats against teachers and staff are widespread.

This week, Republican lawmakers sharply criticized the Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland’s directive, arguing the Biden administration is attempting to silence dissent.
“Your memorandum is a politically-motivated abuse of power and displays a lack of reasoned, sound judgment … confronting parents to oppose the views of the Biden administration and its socialist agenda,” wrote Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) in a letter to the agency.
“Parents are speaking out against Critical Race Theory in schools. Now the Biden administration is cracking down on dissent,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) wrote on Twitter.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

‘False Narrative’: Mark Zuckerberg Hits Back After Far Left ‘Whistleblower’ Testimony
11
In this image from video, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies during a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Thursday, March 25, 2021. (House Energy and Commerce Committee via AP)
House Energy and Commerce Committee via AP
PAUL BOIS6 Oct 2021106

Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg hit back Tuesday after far-left “whistleblower” Frances Haugen testified on Capitol Hill, charging that the media has run with a “false narrative” that takes his company’s work “out of context.”

In a lengthy Facebook post following Frances Haugen’s testimony before the Senate Commerce Subcommittee, Zuckerberg strongly defended his company against the many charges alleged by Haugen, such as her assertion that the company pushes divisive discourse in pursuit of profit.

“It’s difficult to see coverage that misrepresents our work and our motives,” Zuckerberg said. “At the most basic level, I think most of us just don’t recognize the false picture of the company that is being painted.”
Former Facebook employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen testifies before a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing on Capitol Hill, October 5, 2021, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Drew Angerer / POOL / AFP) (Photo by DREW ANGERER/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)
Former Facebook employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen testifies before a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing on Capitol Hill, October 5, 2021, in Washington, DC. (Drew Angerer/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

“Many of the claims don’t make any sense,” he continued. “If social media were as responsible for polarizing society as some people claim, then why are we seeing polarization increase in the US while it stays flat or declines in many countries with just as heavy use of social media around the world?”

“At the heart of these accusations is this idea that we prioritize profit over safety and well-being,” he continued. “That’s just not true.”

Zuckerberg cited Facebook introducing “the Meaningful Social Interactions change to News Feed,” which allowed for “fewer viral videos and more content from friends and family.”

1633568890227.png

“We did [it] knowing it would mean people spent less time on Facebook, but that research suggested it was the right thing for people’s well-being. Is that something a company focused on profits over people would do?” he asserted.

To Haugen’s point that Facebook will “deliberately push content that makes people angry for profit,” Zuckerberg called it “illogical” due to the fact that Facebook makes money from ads, which do not thrive in angry, heated environments.

“We make money from ads, and advertisers consistently tell us they don’t want their ads next to harmful or angry content,” he said. “And I don’t know any tech company that sets out to build products that make people angry or depressed. The moral, business, and product incentives all point in the opposite direction.”
SumOfUs erected a 7ft visual protest outside the US Capitol depicting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg surfing on a wave of cash, while young women surround him appearing to be suffering, September 30, 2021, in Washington. (Eric Kayne/AP Images for SumofUS)
SumOfUs erected a 7ft visual protest outside the US Capitol depicting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg surfing on a wave of cash, while young women surround him appearing to be suffering, September 30, 2021, in Washington. (Eric Kayne/AP Images for SumofUS)

An effigy of Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg (C), dressed as a January 6, 2021, insurrectionist is placed near the US Capitol in Washington, DC, on March 25, 2021. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)
An effigy of Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg (C), dressed as a January 6, 2021, insurrectionist is placed near the US Capitol in Washington, DC, on March 25, 2021. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)

During the subcommittee hearing on Tuesday, both Democrats and Republicans questioned Haugen about Facebook’s effect on children and whether or not the company implements algorithms specifically designed to keep them addicted, like Big Tobacco. On this, while Zuckerberg highlighted Facebook’s work in the area of children, he ultimately punted the issue over to Congress, arguing that democratically elected legislators should be the ones creating clear outlines for how young people should engage with the internet:
Similar to balancing other social issues, I don’t believe private companies should make all of the decisions on their own. That’s why we have advocated for updated internet regulations for several years now. I have testified in Congress multiple times and asked them to update these regulations. I’ve written op-eds outlining the areas of regulation we think are most important related to elections, harmful content, privacy, and competition.
We’re committed to doing the best work we can, but at some level the right body to assess tradeoffs between social equities is our democratically elected Congress. For example, what is the right age for teens to be able to use internet services? How should internet services verify people’s ages? And how should companies balance teens’ privacy while giving parents visibility into their activity?
If we’re going to have an informed conversation about the effects of social media on young people, it’s important to start with a full picture. We’re committed to doing more research ourselves and making more research publicly available.
In a statement following Haugen’s testimony, Facebook Director of Policy Communications Lena Pietsch blasted the former product manager, characterizing Haugen as a low-level employee who had no direct relationship with the types of issues she raised.

Pietsch said:
Today, a Senate Commerce subcommittee held a hearing with the form product manager at Facebook who worked for the company for less than two years, had no direct reports, never attended a decision-point meeting with C-level executives – and testified more than 6×2 not working on the subject matter in question.
“We don’t agree with her characterization of the many issues she testified about,” she added.

Since Haugen unmasked herself in an episode of 60 Minutes this past weekend, conservatives have highlighted her network of far-left connections, such as her enlisting the aid of anti-Trump impeachment lawyers and her previously donating to socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) congressional campaign.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic
[COMMENT: The REAL Agenda - getting alternative conservative sites under government censorship control and imposing leftist "societal standards" for values, beliefs etc.]

Facebook Calls for ‘Standard Rules’ Across Internet
Facebook co-founder, Chairman and CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrives to testify before the House Energy and Commerce Committee in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill April 11, 2018 in Washington, DC. This is the second day of testimony before Congress by Zuckerberg, 33, after it was reported that 87 …
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
LUCAS NOLAN6 Oct 2021287

Following the testimony of far-left Facebook “whistleblower” Frances Haugen before Congress, the social media giant has called for lawmakers to impose “standard rules” across the internet.

The Daily Mail reports that following the testimony of the far-left Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen before Congress this week, the tech giant has admitted that the “internet needs regulating” and has called on lawmakers to develop a set of “standard rules” to be applied across the internet.
Former Facebook employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen testifies before a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing on Capitol Hill, October 5, 2021, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Drew Angerer / POOL / AFP) (Photo by DREW ANGERER/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

Former Facebook employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen testifies before a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing on Capitol Hill, October 5, 2021, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Drew Angerer / POOL / AFP)

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrives for the 8th annual Breakthrough Prize awards ceremony at NASA Ames Research Center in Mountain View, California on November 3, 2019. (Photo by JOSH EDELSON / AFP) (Photo by JOSH EDELSON/AFP via Getty Images)
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrives for the 8th annual Breakthrough Prize awards ceremony at NASA Ames Research Center in Mountain View, California on November 3, 2019. (Photo by JOSH EDELSON / AFP) (Photo by JOSH EDELSON/AFP via Getty Images)

Breitbart News reporter Allum Bokhari discussed the whistleblower’s testimony yesterday, writing:
Far-left Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen says she left the company because it chose to wind down its “civic integrity unit,” which had been accused by Trump supporters of interfering in the 2020 Presidential election.
Haugen was a member of the civic integrity unit, which would likely have been involved in the decision to suppress the New York Post’s Hunter Biden story ahead of the election, as well as other acts of censorship against Trump supporters.
Facebook wound down the unit shortly following the election, which Haugen described as a “betrayal” in her comments before the Senate Commerce Committee today — even though she admitted that Facebook “integrated” the unit in other parts of the company.
Following Haugen’s testimony, Facebook quickly responded that she had never attended meetings with top executives at the firm and claimed that she was misinformed about the company’s operations. In an open letter to staff, CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote: “I’m sure many of you have found the recent coverage hard to read because it just doesn’t reflect the company we know… We care deeply about issues like safety, well-being and mental health. It’s difficult to see coverage that misrepresents our work and our motives.”

Facebook’s Director of Policy Communications Lena Pietsch criticized Haugen heavily, stating that she “worked for the company for less than two years, had no direct reports, never attended a decision-point meeting with C-level executives – and testified more than six times to not working on the subject matter in question.”

However, while Pietsch stated that the company does not agree with Haugen’s characterization of its practices, it does agree that the internet needs to be regulated.

“It’s time to begin to create standard rules for the internet. It’s been 25 years since the rules for the internet have been updated, and instead of expecting the industry to make societal decisions that belong to legislators, it is time for Congress to act,” Pietsch stated.

Read more of Breitbart News’ coverage of the hearing here.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

WATCH: Mainstream Media Hacks Cheer DOJ’s Threats and Assaults on America’s Parents for Speaking Out at School Board Meetings (VIDEO)

By Jim Hoft
Published October 6, 2021 at 7:44pm


Biden’s corrupt Attorney General, Merrick Garland, announced he was going to target parents around the country who oppose the critical race theory (CRT) and masking kids and were speaking up about it at local school board meetings.

It turns out the AG’s son-in-law makes loads of money selling the books schools use to teach about the racist theory.

Following the announcement that the federal government was going to target America’s parents, godless mainstream media hacks cheered.
It was about time!

The mainstream media today is an official branch of the corrupt regime.


Via Tucker Carlson Tonight:

Rumble video on website 1:41 min
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Republican AGs Join Forces To Warn Garland Against ‘Weaponizing’ FBI To Target Parents
Friday Noon Dispatch: Biden's Justice Department Takes Aim At Georgia

Photo by JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images

HAROLD HUTCHISONCONTRIBUTOR
October 06, 20213:41 PM ET
  • Republican state attorneys general criticized Attorney General Merrick Garland for a memo ordering the FBI to get involved with alleged threats against local school boards.
  • The National School Boards Association asked for such an intervention in September.
  • Multiple attorneys general vowed to defend the rights of parents to be involved in debates over public education.
Republican attorneys general across the country criticized Attorney General Merrick Garland for inserting the federal government into protests against school boards that centered on mask mandates and critical race theory.

“In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools,” Garland wrote in a memo sent out Oct. 4 that announced the formation of a task force.

Prior to the memo being issued, the National School Boards Association asked the Biden Administration to intervene.

1633584458263.png
1633584513147.png

“As the threats grow and news of extremist hate organizations showing up at school board meetings is being reported, this is a critical time for a proactive approach to deal with this difficult issue,” the organization wrote in a letter to Biden on Sept. 30.

Critical race theory (CRT) holds that America is fundamentally racist, yet it teaches people to view every social interaction and person in terms of race. Its adherents pursue “antiracism” through the end of merit, objective truth and the adoption of race-based policies.

The Biden administration’s intervention drew fire from Republican attorneys general.

“Biden’s Department of Justice is weaponizing its resources against parents who dare to advocate for their children. This dangerous federal overreach imposes a chilling effect on free speech by criminalizing dissent,” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said in an Oct. 5 release, adding, “I will always advocate for parents and will continue to push back against unprecedented federal overreach.”

In a letter sent to Garland, Schmitt claimed the attorney general had ordered “the FBI, all U.S. attorneys, and other members of the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute parents as domestic terrorists for daring to advocate for their kids.”

Other GOP attorneys general also took aim at Garland’s memo.

“A threat of physical harm against a public official is a criminal act. It is not part of public discourse,” Ohio attorney General Dave Yost told the Daily Caller News Foundation via a spokeswoman. “It is also not a federal case. Unless there is a conspiracy across state lines, or some such, it is not the federal government’s business, any more than a bar fight—and Merrick Garland knows better.”

Yost went on to urge public officials to call local law enforcement if they got threats.

“It seems as if Attorney General Garland is following the playbook of a partisan administration and weaponizing both the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI by threatening parents who simply do not want their children to be indoctrinated by a Marxist ideology that divides children into groups of oppressed and oppressor while simultaneously teaching our students that America is fundamentally evil,” a statement from Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita provided to the Daily Caller News Foundation said.

“President Biden’s use of the Justice Department to investigate is grossly inappropriate and nothing more than a political stunt at taxpayer expense. Threats of violence to anyone, including local school board members, will not be tolerated and my office will work with local law enforcement to prevent and prosecute any such criminal conduct,” Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge told the Daily Caller News Foundation in a statement released via a spokeswoman. Rutledge went on to suggest that Biden instead use federal law enforcement to secure the border.

Other Republican attorneys general vowed to protect the First Amendment rights of parents.

“Parents have a right to be involved in their children’s educational interests and should not be silenced. I urge General Garland to allow political speech to flourish and give local governments and local law enforcement room to handle these matters,” Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch said in a statement released to the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Public debate at a school board meeting is a vital exercise of basic First Amendment rights at the local level. What happens in public schools is critical to shaping our nation’s young people, and parents have a constitutional right to address those matters publicly,” a statement from Nebraska Attorney General Doug Pederson provided to the Daily Caller News Foundation read.

One state attorney general accused the Biden administration of using the Justice Department to force critical race theory into education.

“The Biden Administration continues to politicize the DOJ, ignore the rule of law, and undermine state sovereignty. This is the latest shameful attempt to force Critical Race Theory upon our impressionable children, against the will of their parents. We will not tolerate this gross federal overreach and intimidation of Arizona families,” Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich told the Daily Caller News Foundation in a statement provided via a spokeswoman.

“Arizona parents are rightly concerned and outraged by CRT being induced upon our schools and children. As a father of two daughters myself, I am encouraged that thousands of parents have awakened to this infestation of our children’s minds and are standing up to school boards and university systems to stop this curriculum,” Brnovich added in a letter sent to Garland obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Brnovich also disputed the claim of a rash of threats to local school officials.

“The vast majority of parents are protesting in accordance with their protected constitutional rights; the few who cross the lines into violence are appropriately dealt with by local law enforcement and existing laws,” Brnovich went on to say.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Big Biz has found that Critical Race Theory is bad for business

Charles Gasparino
October 2, 2021 11:20pm

Several large financial institutions are now staying away from Critical Race Theory based training.
Several large financial institutions are now staying away from Critical Race Theory-based training.Sipa via AP Images

Charles Gasparino


I’ve noticed something lately covering the woke culture that’s threatening to turn corporate offices into university-style safe spaces: There are apparently limits to how far left big companies are willing to veer to gain progressive brownie points.

Case in point: the much-celebrated diversity hustle that companies had begun to embrace during our summer of “largely peaceful protests.” Of course, we all want a diverse workforce, but after the tragic murder of George Floyd, some firms thought it would be smart to indoctrinate office workers in that noxious fad known as Critical Race Theory.

CRT is an amalgam of left-wing talking points spewed out by the growing diversity-consulting business. The stated purpose by its practitioners sounds noble enough: Use CRT to root out racism and make the world a better place.

How CRT gets there is the problem. Racism gets rooted out mainly by brainwashing white people into believing they are inherently evil racists. They are inherently evil racists because America is systemically racist, no matter how much it has strived during its history to be better.

Thus to be good corporate citizens, they need to be re-educated and reprogrammed from their inherently racist past.

If you think that sounds a little like the stuff Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot pushed back in the day, you wouldn’t be wrong. CRT began where most dumb ideas begin, among leftists on college campuses. It wasn’t long before it somehow began seeping into the mainstream, into classrooms and finally into corporate America, particularly after the unrest of the past year.

Yet suddenly CRT has begun to face obstacles. Across the country, parents are objecting to teaching kids they are evil little racists. While it is always dangerous to draw broad conclusions from isolated instances, the evidence is mounting that CRT is now coming under review in corporate America as well.

What critical race theory is really about
According to my reporting, corporate HR departments, particularly on Wall Street, are worried that overly politicized and polarizing diversity training is among the most counterproductive fads in recent years if you want your workforce to get along.

Worse, it is just bad for business.

Consider: At the height of the racial unrest last year, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon was taking a knee in apparent support of the radical and Marxist “Black Lives Matter” movement.

The New York Times reported that the e-mail inbox of Robin DiAngelo, the academic considered one of the key architects of CRT, “was flooded with urgent e-mails” from various companies requesting that she share her thoughts with their employees.

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon taking a knee with employees amid the Black Lives Matters protests in 2020.

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon takes a knee with staff amid the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests.JPMorgan Chase

One of those companies, according to the Times, was Goldman Sachs. But when Eleanor Terrett of Fox Business pressed Goldman on the matter, a senior executive denied that DiAngelo was ever retained for its diversity training.

(DiAngelo did not respond to a request for comment.)

Goldman appears not to be alone in drawing the line in its CRT wokeness. Executives at Bank of America, Morgan Stanley and, yes, Dimon’s JPMorgan all claim they are not advocating CRT as part of their diversity training.
https://nypost.com/2021/08/11/american-express-tells-its-workers-capitalism-is-racist/
So why the ostensible about-face? Part of it is embarrassment, I believe. The big banks saw how foolish American Express, the mega-profitable credit-card company, looked recently when Chris Rufo of the Manhattan Institute reported how the company has forced its employees to take part in anti-American, anti-capitalist, CRT “bias” training. (Amex is still ducking my calls and e-mails on the matter).

CRT is also counterproductive. Big companies, particularly big investment banks, rely on teamwork. CRT does just the opposite, dividing people along racial lines between oppressors and the oppressed. “We need people to get along,” said one executive at a big bank that has cleansed CRT from training sessions.

Of course, it’s difficult for me to know whether the CRT cease-and-desist is real. (I’m not in the training sessions to determine if Goldman or JPMorgan, for example, have replaced CRT with something equally absurd that simply drops the noxious-sounding name.)

That said, workplace-inclusion consultants with whom I spoke say the trend away from this divisive training is happening because it’s both exhausting and idiotic to tell people they are inherently evil and expect them to work together.

“I think there’s a recognition that companies were failing to ask if they were leaning too much into identity along the lines of race, ethnicity and gender,” said Ilana Redstone, a sociology professor at the University of Illinois and founder of Diverse Perspectives Consulting. “I think that is now changing. There is a middle ground where those dimensions of identity matter and so does the individual.

Not everyone sees their race, ethnicity or gender as the most important part of who they are.”
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uxYkgyboYU
.15 min

Push 'Em Back
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

IT WAS A SETUP: Fake Whistleblower Frances Haugen Was Part of Anti-Trump Election Meddling Team that Banned Hunter Biden Laptop Content

By Jim Hoft
Published October 7, 2021 at 10:35am

It was all a setup.

On Tuesday Facebook “whistleblower” and Democrat donor, Frances Haugen went before a Senate subcommittee this week two days after appearing on “60 Minutes” to push for more tech control of free speech as they see fit.

Facebook, Google-YouTube, and Twitter have been eliminating conservative voices on their platform for years. Even President Trump was banned from Facebook after their fake news reports that he organized an “insurrection” at the US Capitol on Jan. 6th.

According to FOX News, Haugen has donated 37 times and given nearly $2,000 to Democrats and related PACs since 2016 while being employed at Facebook, Pinterest, and Gigster, according to Federal Election Commission records.

And now this…

Frances Haugen was part of the anti-Trump Facebook team that banned Hunter Biden content from their platforms in the run-up to the 2020 election.

Frances Haugen is a fraud.


Breitbart.com reported:
Far-left Facebook “whistleblower” Frances Haugen, who has advised lawmakers to pass legislation that would empower the establishment media at the expense of independent creators, worked for a unit at Facebook tasked with preventing “misinformation” around the 2020 election — the same group that would have been involved in censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story.
It was called the “Civic Integrity Unit,” and as Haugen herself revealed, it was established just in time for the 2020 election, and wound down as soon as Biden won.
This unit, which was tasked with combating “disinformation” around the election, would almost certainly have been involved in the decision to suppress the New York Post’s story.
What’s more, Haugen told the Wall Street Journal that she only joined Facebook in the first place because she wanted to fight “misinformation.”
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

ONE DAY After Facebook “Whistleblower” Begs Congress to Crack Down on Conservatives – Facebook Deletes Fundraising Posts for Jan. 6 Political Prisoners

By Jim Hoft
Published October 7, 2021 at 9:11am


It was all a setup.

On Tuesday Facebook “whistleblower” and Democrat donor, Frances Haugen went before a Senate subcommittee this week two days after appearing on “60 Minutes” to push for more tech control of free speech as they see fit.

Facebook, Google-YouTube, and Twitter have been eliminating conservative voices on their platform for years. Even President Trump was banned from Facebook after their fake news reports that he organized an “insurrection” at the US Capitol on Jan. 6th.

According to FOX News, Haugen has donated 37 times and given nearly $2,000 to Democrats and related PACs since 2016 while being employed at Facebook, Pinterest, and Gigster, according to Federal Election Commission records.

On Wednesday morning, Rep. Madison Cawthorne (R-NC) joined Stuart Varney on Varney and Co. to discuss Facebook and the peculiar “whistleblower” Frances Haugen.

Cawthorne told Stuart he was concerned with this so-called whistleblower whose goal was to censor conservatives and the right to free speech in America.

Madison Cawthorne was right.

On Wednesday night Facebook began banning, censoring and eliminating ANY POSTS and PLATFORMS that raised money for the Jan. 6 political prisoners.

Facebook is sending out warnings to the pages that helped raise money for the Jan. 6 political prisoners who are unjustly sitting in prison without trial for their role or non-role in the Jan. 6 protests and riot.

Shawn Bradley Witzemann posted this on Twitter last night (Wednesday) on Facebook banning Tribune Media International page.



And Facebook warned the Intellectual Froglegs that their page faces possible suspension for posting a fundraiser for #WalkAway founder Brandon Straka BACK IN FEBRUARY.

Intellectual Froglegs is a conservative comedian — and very good at mocking the insanity on the left!



Joe Dan was flagged for posting a fundraiser in February for Brandon Straka.



We suspect this was not an isolated incident.

Via Kevin — Facebook is banning people for linking to fundraiser pages supporting those patriots who languish in jail.

Even Iran had a show trial for Jason Rezaian. We can’t even get that for American citizens in their own country.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

1633643737618.png

Loudoun County parents, a small but mighty group, celebrated victory yesterday. Together with a Virginia-based advocacy group, Fight for Schools, the parents are one step closer to recalling school board member Beth Barts. Loudoun County Circuit Court Judge Jeanette A. Irby ruled in their favor—three times—after months of showing up at school board meetings and working tirelessly to petition citizens to sign off in the first step toward Barts’ removal.

1633644094541.png
1633644050282.png

The group collected 1,860 signatures, accusing Barts of “neglect of duty, misuse of office, and incompetence in the performance of her duties.


Ian Prior/Fight for Schools/Facebook page

According to the Loudoun Times-Mirror:

Loudoun County Circuit Court Judge Jeanette A. Irby will appoint a special prosecutor in a case brought by a group of Loudoun County residents seeking the removal of School Board member Beth Barts (Leesburg District). Irby granted the group’s motion to disqualify Commonwealth’s Attorney Buta Biberaj (D) and appoint a special prosecutor on Tuesday during a pre-trial hearing on motions in front of couple dozen people following the case in court and online.

Ian Prior, Founder of Fight for Schools, and the Loudoun parents who joined him felt that Biberaj had a conflict of interest and the group asked that she be removed. The judge requested the group give her a week to find a prosecutor and made Fight For Schools a plaintiff in the case—an unprecedented move.

A spokesperson for the group in a Fight for Schools Facebook post maintains that Barts behavior demands her removal:


Remove Beth Barts/Fight for Schools Facebook page

Prior, quoted below by the Loudoun Times-Mirror, says it is time to have a seat at the table:

Parents had been wanting a seat at the table for really over a year and a half in ensuring accountability with their school board, elected officials, and I think we got that today,” said Ian Prior, executive director of Fight for Schools.

We were allowed to intervene and we’ve also wanted a fair process, so that we could be assured that however this shakes out at the end, we can be confident in the result that the system was fair, that justice was served,he said. I think the judge made it clear appointing a special prosecutor is the best way to do that and we’re very happy with the results.

Fight for Schools seeks to remove six Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) board members. Prior says they have enough signatures to remove at least two. Loudoun Times-Mirror also mentioned in another article the other School Board members “include Chairwoman Brenda Sheridan (Sterling District), Vice Chairwoman Atoosa Reaser (Algonkian District), Denise Corbo (At-Large) and Ian Serotkin (Blue Ridge District). School Board member Leslee King, who represented the Broad Run District and was targeted for removal, died [in early September] due to complications from heart surgery.

Barts was removed from her committee duties early in the summer because her online Facebook activism targeted dissenting parents in the community. She had allegedly asked members in her group to target, harass and even hack parents who disagreed with her stance on Critical Race Theory.

According to the Daily Wire, Barts and member Jen Morse instigated online activity through a Facebook group, whose members included Loudoun County educators, to infiltrate the anti-CRT parents in the Virginia suburb. The thread began with a post from Barts on March 12:

Barts wrote on March 12 around 9:30 a.m. that ‘I am very concerned that this CRT “movement” for lack of a better word, is gaining support. It is difficult for me to bring attention to it without calling out specifics which may violate our code of conduct.

Member Jen Morse replied to Barts’ post asking the group’s administrator, Jamie Ann Neidig-Wheaton, ‘Is it okay if I post a call for volunteers for these counter activities?’ She then posted below Barts’ comment, ‘I put up a call for volunteers post.’ That referred to a thread that called to ‘infiltrate’, deploy ‘hackers who can shut down their websites’, and ‘expose these people publicly’.

UncoverDC spoke in June with many of the parents who were fighting CRT in the schools. Several parents said the attacks by the Barts’ social media group were vicious and personal. Some parents were doxxed and were afraid for their children and families.

An investigation of Barts’ activities run by the local Sheriff’s department, concluded in August, found nothing worthy of criminal charges. However, the department did offer parents the “option to pursue misdemeanor criminal charges or other civil remedies if they choose to.

#ArmyofParents co-Founder, Elicia Brand, told UncoverDC her thoughts about Tuesday’s victory:

We won three different motions yesterday, including a motion to dismiss. The judge gave a third party, Fight for Schools, a seat at the table, a precedent-setting ruling.

When asked why she thinks the judge ruled the way she did, Brand responded:

I think she understands that the parents—I don’t want to speak for the judge because I can never say what she’s thinking inside her head—but we have never once threatened the school board. We stand against violence. We definitely stand against threatening behavior and anytime any member of our school board has ever been threatened, every one of us—all of the leaders—me with Army of Parents and Ian with Fight for Schools have stood up and said this is wrong. And we do not accept this. We’ve said that publicly.

We have been on the other side of it where we have been the victims of targeted threats on social media and in person. I think that she saw that she recognizes, in my opinion, that political ideology and agendas have no place in the schools and that we have to create a safe harbor that has nothing to do with us or the school board, but that has everything to do with our children.

Brand added:

As an American, a co-Founder of #ArmyOfParents, but mostly as a mother, there is no document, word or order that can ever be given that will stop me from putting my children’s, and EVERY child’s welfare first and foremost. Our School Board has become an activist body caring more about political ideology than the best interests of our children. Now they are supported by an Authoritarian Government set on stomping on our rights and usurping our roles as parents in our children’s lives.

I encourage all parents to stand strong in their fight for freedom and parental rights and never falter in the face of unjustified threats, no matter whom they are coming from. I hope the proper authorities are used to finding those who threaten violence or speak such hateful words, but they will not find them in the Loudoun County parent community, as we stand against that. Moms and Dads will stand strong in our faith of doing right and our peaceful mission to protect our children even more now that this letter has been released, as we are at the tipping point where the free America that we love can quickly become the America to be feared. We owe this to our children and the generations that follow.

In her social media post after the hearing, Barts wonders what will happen if she gets removed. The post below was shared by Brand.


Barts post/Oct. 4, 2021

Prior has emphasized that it is important to remain respectful and “substantive” when engaging educators and school board members and encourages parents to keep raising their voices. A post from the Fight for Schools Facebook page reads:

Quick note. Never back down keep holding your school board accountable. But keep it substantive. They are public officials abusing their power. Point it out. Over and over again. But do not attack beyond that. It’s understandable that emotions will run high when our kids are involved and we feel trapped. And when they are calling us domestic terrorists. But resist the urge to fight fire with fire. Fight fire with ice-cold precision.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1445505460245647369
no/rt
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

AG Merrick Garland’s Son-in-Law Cofounder of Company Promoting Critical Race Theory
3
US Attorney General Merrick Garland holds a press conference to announce a lawsuit against Texas at the Department of Justice in Washington, DC on September 9, 2021 - The US Justice Department filed suit against the state of Texas on Thursday over its new law that bans abortions after six …
MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images
DR. SUSAN BERRY7 Oct 20211,635

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland’s son-in-law is a co-founder of an educational data mining company that promotes the tenets of Critical Race Theory (CRT), a report at Becker News observed Wednesday.

The report noting Garland’s family ties to CRT comes in the wake of the attorney general’s memorandum directing the FBI to mobilize against parents who oppose CRT and mask mandates in K-12 schools and speak out about their concerns.

As the New York Times reported, in 2018, Garland’s daughter, Rebecca, married Alexander “Xan” Tanner, co-founder and president of Panorama Education, a Boston-based software and analytical data services company that boasts its founders were once “student activists.”

The Times wedding announcement states:
The bride’s father, Judge Merrick B. Garland, took part in the ceremony, giving a tribute to the couple … The bride’s father is the chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in Washington. Her mother advises government and nonprofit groups on voting systems security and accuracy issues.
Panorama produces data mining surveys for schools, including “equity and inclusion surveys” and conducts “professional development” training in the areas of equity and inclusion for teachers and administrators.
The company states about its survey:
The Panorama Equity and Inclusion Survey provides schools and districts with a clear picture of how students, teachers, and staff are thinking and feeling about diversity, equity, and inclusion in school.
The survey can help schools and districts track the progress of equity initiatives through the lens of students and staff, identify areas for celebration and improvement, inform professional development, and signal the importance of equity and inclusion to the community.
“By asking students, teachers, and staff to reflect on their experiences of equity and inclusion in school, education leaders can gather actionable data to understand and improve the racial and cultural climate on campus,” Panorama states, adding:
Any middle or high school community that values diversity, equity, and inclusivity can use this survey. The student questions are designed to be developmentally appropriate for grades 6-12.
In June 2020, Panorama co-founder and CEO Aaron Feuer wrote in a company blog post titled “Our Stand Against Systemic Racism”:
We are angered and heartbroken by the murder of George Floyd last week, yet another act of violence against a Black person in America, and yet another consequence of this long history of systemic racism in America.
This must change. As millions of people across the country stand up to protest this system of racism and oppression, we stand with them.
We say decisively: Black people matter. Black students matter. Black educators matter. Black teammates matter. Black lives matter.
“We commit to dismantling systemic racism, we commit to embodying and spreading anti-racist practices, and we commit to building systems of opportunity and possibility for students of color,” Feuer continued, elaborating:
Education represents one of the most important levers for change in America. At worst, our education system can perpetuate oppression and injustice, withholding opportunity from children of marginalized communities, and allowing racism to continue unchecked. At best, our education system can combat racism, open up opportunities for children, and help every student take pride in their identity. We now serve 10 million students and 1,500 school districts. That puts us in a unique position to make change to our institutions through our partnership with school districts.
“This school year will be an especially important moment for racial equity in education, as our nation’s children begin to recover from a pandemic that has disproportionately affected Black and Brown communities and exacerbated pre-existing inequalities in American society,” Feuer wrote, urging readers to review a “call to action” by DeSoto, Texas, Independent School District Superintendent Dr. D’Andre Weaver.

“Let me repeat his words,” Feuer emphasized. “A reimagined education system is our antiracist protest.”

In her Substack column, Parents Defending Education director of outreach Erika Sanzi linked to a Panorama school climate survey that was administered to her son.

In the section on “Social and Emotional Learning,” sandwiched in between questions about if a student feels “like you belong at your school” and “Do you have an Individualized Learning Plan?” is Question 67: “Do you know that Rhode Island state law allows Rhode Island residents who are US Citizens to pre-register to vote at age 16?”

A Techcrunch press release dated September 2 indicates Panorama raised “$60 million in a Series C round of funding led by General Atlantic.”

According to the release, Panorama’s existing backers include the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, a group formed by Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Chan.

The release continues:
Panorama declined to reveal at what valuation the Series C was raised, nor did it provide any specific financial growth metrics. CEO and co-founder Aaron Feuer did say the company now serves 13 million students in 23,000 schools across the United States, which means that 25% of American students are enrolled in a district served by Panorama today.
Over 50 of the largest 100 school districts and state agencies in the country use its platform. In total, more than 1,500 school districts are among its customers. Clients include the New York City Department of Education, Clark County School District in Nevada, Dallas ISD in Texas and the Hawaii Department of Education, among others.
Garland’s memorandum was released just days after a letter to President Joe Biden from the National School Board Association (NSBA) sought federal law enforcement help to cope with frustrated and concerned parents the group likened to “domestic terrorists.”

NSBA asked Biden to issue an executive order that would serve to protect school officials and school board members from parents after review of “appropriate enforceable actions against these crimes and acts of violence under the Gun-Free School Zones Act, the PATRIOT Act in regards to domestic terrorism, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the Violent Interference with Federally Protected Rights statute, the Conspiracy Against Rights statute.”

NSBA complained in its letter that parents are objecting to the teaching of concepts of Critical Race Theory.

“This propaganda continues despite the fact that critical race theory is not taught in public schools and remains a complex law school and graduate school subject well beyond the scope of a K-12 class,” the group asserted.

Last month, however, the United States Conference of Mayors adopted a resolution during its annual convention in which its members pledged to support the teaching of Critical Race Theory in K-12 schools.

“NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the nation’s mayors support the implementation of CRT in the public education curriculum to help engage our youth in programming that reflects an accurate, complete account of BIPOC history,” the mayors stated.

In July, the National Education Association (NEA), the nation’s largest teachers’ union, also moved to openly promote the teaching of Critical Race Theory in K-12 schools and to oppose any bans on instruction in both the Marxist ideology and the widely discredited New York Times’ “1619 Project.”

The union agreed to “research the organizations attacking educators,” doing what it referred to as “anti-racist work,” as well as to “use the research already done and put together a list of resources and recommendations for state affiliates, locals, and individual educators to utilize when they are attacked.”

NEA dismissed the outrage of grassroots parents, claiming the main critics of Critical Race Theory are “well-funded” conservative groups.

“The attacks on anti-racist teachers are increasing, coordinated by well-funded organizations such as the Heritage Foundation,” the union said. “We need to be better prepared to respond to these attacks so that our members can continue this important work.”
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Joe Biden Appoints Critical Race Theory Activist to Department of Education amid Crackdown on Parents
752
Precious McKesson. Nebraska Democratic Party via Facebook).
Nebraska Democratic Party via Facebook
BRECCAN F. THIES7 Oct 2021663

President Joe Biden has appointed Precious McKesson, a Nebraska Democrat, racial radical, and Critical Race Theory activist, to the position of Special Assistant in the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Communications and Outreach.

Chair of the Nebraska Democrat Black Caucus and former Finance Director for the statewide party, McKesson recently embedded herself in the Critical Race Theory issue when she and some of her colleagues from the Nebraska Democrat Party’s Latinx [sic], black, and Native caucuses wrote an August 11 op-ed for the Lincoln Journal Star to oppose a measure to ban Critical Race Theory from being taught at the University of Nebraska.
Precious McKesson. (Nebraska Democratic Party / Facebook).
Precious McKesson (Nebraska Democratic Party / Facebook).

Misleadingly, McKesson and co-authors Dulce Sherman and Collette Yellow Robe wrote that “Simply put, CRT examines social, cultural and legal issues as they relate to race and racism. Students would be taught about the systemic racism that still exists today and permeates our society.”

But this does not reflect the experience of many parents and students across the country who have seen a radical education curriculum take root, through the lens of the manifestly racist Critical Race Theory, which pushes the ideology that skin color ought to be the primary trait with which to judge others; or that black persons are inherently worthless in American society, and that they somehow cannot engage in “objective, rational linear thinking” or be on time; or that a black person’s purported worthlessness is directly attributable to some ether that is core to the existence of being a white person; and that because of these attributes, all white people are necessarily racist.

According to McKesson, however, it is the attempts to stop the teaching of the indoctrination scheme that “create a wedge between white communities and communities of color, making us the villain.” Continuing further, the new Department of Education appointee also believes that if Critical Race Theory were not an educational mainstay, “students would not be taught about the Tulsa race massacre” and “Our kids would never learn about the Trail of Tears,” calling attempts to block its teaching a “red herring resolution to erase history.”

“Denying our factual history as communities of color is like denying we existed,” McKesson and her comrades concluded.

Republican Study Committee Chair Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) said of McKesson’s appointment that “The Biden administration claims CRT [Critical Race Theory] doesn’t exist, then appoints a CRT activist to the Department of Education and sics the FBI on parents who oppose their poisonous ideology,” according to the Daily Mail.

Banks was referring to the recent directive from Attorney General Merrick Garland for the FBI to go after parents who are opposed to Critical Race Theory indoctrination in their children’s schools.


Joe Biden congratulates Judge Merrick Garland after he was nominated by U.S. President Barack Obama to the Supreme Court in the Rose Garden at the White House, March 16, 2016, in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Banks said that McKesson’s appointment is a “slap in the face to parents across the country.”

“At a time when President Biden’s Justice Department is targeting school parents for simply voicing their concerns and objection to the teaching of radical curriculum in our nation’s schools,” Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) began, condemning McKesson’s appointment, “saying it is shocking, but not surprising, that they’ve moved to confirm another CRT advocate to a high rank within the Department of Education.”

McKesson’s new position makes her part of the team responsible for communicating department policy to parents and the general public. She was sworn in on October 4.
 
Last edited:

marsh

TB Fanatic

Report: Far Left Facebook ‘Whistleblower’ Frances Haugen to Meet with January 6 Committee
22
Former Facebook employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen testifies before a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing on Capitol Hill, October 5, 2021, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Drew Angerer / POOL / AFP) (Photo by DREW ANGERER/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)
DREW ANGERER/POOL/AFP via Getty Images
PAUL BOIS7 Oct 202152

The left-wing Facebook “whistleblower” Frances Haugen will reportedly meet with the U.S. House committee investigating the January 6 riot, according to CNN.

During her testimony before the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Tuesday and her interview on 60 Minutes Sunday, Haugen charged that Facebook pushes divisive discourse on its platform to increase profits, alleging the company played a role in the January 6 riot on Capitol Hill by lifting the 2020 election safeguards it had put in place. When asked for a solution, Haugen asserted that people such as herself should be the ones in charge of regulating Facebook.

“Right now, the only people in the world who are trained to analyze these experiments, to understand what is happening inside of Facebook, are people who ‘grew up’ inside of Facebook, or Pinterest, or another social media company,” Haugen said before the committee.

As it turns out, just one day after she testified before Congress, three sources confirmed to CNN she will be meeting with the January 6 committee as early as Thursday.

“The select committee is also interested in hearing from Haugen, CNN has learned, as she could provide insight into how Facebook was used to ultimately facilitate violence that occurred at the US Capitol on January 6,” reported CNN.

Pro-Trump supporters storm the US Capitol following a rally with President Donald Trump on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. Trump supporters gathered in the nation's capital today to protest the ratification of President-elect Joe Biden's Electoral College victory over President Trump in the 2020 election. (Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)
Pro-Trump supporters storm the US Capitol following a rally with President Donald Trump on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. Trump supporters gathered in the nation’s capital today to protest the ratification of President-elect Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory over President Trump in the 2020 election. (Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

The report follows a tweet from House Intelligence Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) on Monday that the select committee “will need to hear from her [Haugen], and get internal info from Facebook to flesh out their role.”

“According to this Facebook whistleblower, shutting down the civic integrity team and turning off election misinformation tools contributed to the Jan 6 insurrection,” tweeted Schiff. ” The Select Committee will need to hear from her, and get internal info from Facebook to flesh out their role.”

In a statement following Haugen’s testimony, Facebook Director of Policy Communications Lena Pietsch blasted the former product manager, characterizing Haugen as a low-level employee who had no direct relationship with the types of issues she raised:
Today, a Senate Commerce subcommittee held a hearing with the form product manager at Facebook who worked for the company for less than two years, had no direct reports, never attended a decision-point meeting with C-level executives – and testified more than six times to not working on the subject matter in question.
We don’t agree with her characterization of the many issues she testified about.
In a lengthy Facebook post, CEO Mark Zuckerberg charged that many of Haugen’s claims painted a “false narrative” that made little sense in light of the facts.

“Many of the claims don’t make any sense,” he said. “If social media were as responsible for polarizing society as some people claim, then why are we seeing polarization increase in the US while it stays flat or declines in many countries with just as heavy use of social media around the world?”

“At the heart of these accusations is this idea that we prioritize profit over safety and well-being,” he added. “That’s just not true.”
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

The Answer to Combatting Communism, the Evil Force Behind the Transition Taking Place in America Today, is the TRUTH (VIDEO)

By Joe Hoft
Published October 7, 2021 at 9:00pm


The answer to combatting socialism and communism, the demonic force behind the transition taking place in America today, is the TRUTH.

We all know that there is an evil force blanketing our country. Elections are stolen, terrorists are given billions, soldiers are offered up like sheep to our enemies, pro-growth and stable economic policies are lost and lies are everywhere. Just this week the top individual overseeing our country’s justice system threatened good Americans for speaking their mind.

1633660701712.png

Our freedoms are being taken away and our children are being taught to hate Caucasians with racist teachings. Free speech is taken away by Big Tech Oligarchs and Big Media pushes all these lies.

What is the answer? What do we do?
Great and courageous leaders in the past have told us what to do in situations like this.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the Russian political prisoner, and dissident shared:
And therein we find, neglected by us, the simplest, the most accessible key to our liberation: a personal non-participation in lies! Even if all is covered by lies, even if all is under their rule, let us resist in the smallest way: Let their rule hold not through me!
1633660548971.png
1633660503638.png

Vaclav Havel, the Czech statesman, and dissident turned President of Czechoslovakia, shared this:
If the main pillar of the totaliarian system is living a lie, then it is not surprising that the fundimental threat to it is living the truth. This is why [the truth] must be suppressed more severely [by the communists] than anything else.
View: https://youtu.be/6VfJ0BJvt7Y
12:02 min

The Truth is the answer. Individually and together we must stand for the truth.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Exclusive: Lauren Boebert Demands DOJ Show Data Behind Decision to ‘Attack American Parents’ Who Oppose CRT
21
Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., speaks at a news conference held by members of the House Freedom Caucus on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, July 29, 2021, to complain about Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. and masking policies. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
ASHLEY OLIVER7 Oct 2021557

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) is demanding President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) provide the data behind its recent claim of “an increase” in “threats of violence” against local school officials, a charge the DOJ is using to justify mobilizing the FBI.

Boebert, a House Freedom Caucus member and outspoken critic of the Biden administration, wrote Thursday in a letter obtained by Breitbart News to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland that she wants a copy of current data and “all the data from previous years that can corroborate” Garland’s increased threats claim.

“I am alarmed by your decision to weaponize the Department of Justice (DOJ) against concerned parents, exercising their First Amendment rights, who dare to oppose the teaching of critical race theory, a repulsive and racist ideology, in their children’s’ schools,” Boebert wrote, adding her requests for data.
Read a full copy of the letter below:

Garland announced in a memo Monday that he was directing the FBI to meet with state and local officials because “in recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools.”

The attorney general observed that such behavior is illegal, to which Boebert contended that the criminal activity Garland is referring to is in reality parents “expressing their frustrations about mask mandates and critical race theory which conveniently run counter to this regime’s agenda.”

The congresswoman also requested in her letter a copy of Garland’s recusal list, signed ethics pledge, and any other documentation the attorney general provided when he took office to communicate conflicts of interest he could encounter while in his position.

That portion of Boebert’s request comes after a report on Wednesday charged that Garland’s son-in-law, Xan Tanner, is cofounder of Panorama Education, a company that “promotes the tenets of Critical Race Theory.”

Boebert noted the family connection means Garland “is potentially benefiting” from his “new propaganda operation.”

She continued, “While your family is personally benefiting from the exact kind of propaganda these parents are protesting, you are using your immense power as Attorney General to stifle their First Amendment rights. While your actions are unconstitutional, you should have recused yourself from this matter given the clear conflict of interest.”

The Colorado Republican said in a statement provided to Breitbart News, “The United States Attorney General is weaponizing the DOJ to attack American parents who disagree with Critical Race Theory. Surprise surprise, his son-in-law is in the business of spreading CRT. This is wrong. This is corrupt. I’m demanding answers.”

Boebert asked that Garland meet her requests by November 1, 2021.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Rand Paul's Warning to Americans: ‘Be Afraid of Your Government'

BY MATT MARGOLIS OCT 07, 2021 11:51 AM ET


Stefani Reynolds/The New York Times via AP, Pool

In the wake of Attorney General Merrick Garland’s announcement that he plans to sic the FBI on concerned parents who speak out at school board meetings against critical race theory and COVID restrictions, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) blasted the Biden administration and said Americans should “be afraid of your government.”

“Moms at school boards are being told that they’re criminals, potential domestic terrorists, for the crime of dissent, and I think criminalizing dissent is something that we should all be appalled with,” Paul told Fox News.

Garland claimed that there has been a “disturbing trend” of teachers being threatened or harassed. PJ Media’s Megan Fox looked into these allegations and concluded they’re mostly bunk.

When asked what he would tell Americans concerned that they’ll end up on some government list if they “say the wrong thing” at their local school board meeting, Paul didn’t mince words.

“I would say be afraid. Be afraid of your government,” he responded. “That’s a sad thing from someone in the government to say, but the thing is, is those lists already exist.”

“I think the problem is, it’s become so normalized to use government to search out and seek out your opponents,” Paul continued, before citing the abuse of FISA warrants to illegally spy on the Trump campaign as an example.

“If you go to a school board meeting and you’re disruptive and you don’t obey the rules of the school board meeting, then there will be local punishment,” Paul said. “But that has nothing to do with the federal law, it has nothing to do with the Department of Justice. What Merrick Garland did is, he’s attempting to stifle dissent, and he’s attempting to say, ‘Beware, or Big Brother’s coming after you if you speak out against my policies or against the Biden policies.’”

Rumble video on website 4:37 min
 
Top