Facebook Blocks Secret Recording of DOJ Official Saying Trump Case is “Nonsense”

Facebook is once again at the center of a censorship storm after being accused of blocking the circulation of a video exposing harsh criticisms by a official regarding the prosecution of former President Donald Trump.

The video, also published on Rumble features undercover footage showing Nicholas Biase, the chief spokesman for the Manhattan US Attorney’s Office, which brought cases against President Trump, slamming Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s Trump case as a “perversion of justice.”

“Honestly, I think the case is nonsense,” Biase says in the video.

Users who went to share the video on Facebook were hit with the following message: “We can’t review this website because the content doesn’t meet our Community Standards. If you think this is a mistake, please let us know.”

Keep reading

Brazil’s $9,000 Fine For Accessing X Puts “Wall Of Censorship” Between Citizens And Unregulated Information

Brazil has not just banned X (formerly Twitter) from the entire country, but citizens will now be fined $9,000 a day (more than the average salary in the country) for using VPNs to access the platform. X is the main source of news for Brazilians, who will now be left with government-approved sources or face financial ruin in seeking unfettered information.

The Guardian is reporting that the confiscatory fines are part of a comprehensive crackdown on efforts to get news through X, including ordering all Apple stores to remove X from new phones.

The move puts Brazil with China in the effort to create a wall of censorship between citizens and unregulated information.

For the anti-free speech movement, Brazil is a key testing ground for where the movement is heading next. European censors are arresting CEOs like Pavel Durov while threatening Elon Musk.

However, it is Brazil that foreshadows the brave new world of censorship where entire nations will block access to sites committed to free speech values or unfettered news. If successful, the Brazilian model is likely to be replicated by other countries.

The reason is that censorship is not working. As discussed in my book The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” we have never seen the current alliance of government, corporate, academic, and media interest against free speech. Yet, citizens are not buying it.

Despite unrelenting attacks and demonizing media coverage, citizens are still using X and resisting censorship. That was certainly the case in Brazil where citizens preferred X to regulated news sources. The solution is now to threaten citizens with utter ruin if they seek unfettered news.

The question is whether Brazil’s leftist government can get away with this. The conflict began with demands to censor supporters of the conservative former president Jair Bolsonaro. When X refused the sweeping demands for censorship, including the demand to name of a legal representative who could be arrested for refusing to censor users, the courts moved toward this national ban.

Keep reading

BRAZILIAN CONFUSION: Hefty Fines for Accessing Social Media Platform X via VPN Were NOT Rescinded – What Changed Was that VPNs Are Not Outright Banned In the Country Anymore

Brazil, thy name is confusion.

There is a saying here in the ‘tropical country’ that says: ‘Brazil is for professionals‘.

Being born and raised here, we are used to a maze of bureaucracy and a general lack of clarity in all public matters.

Following the blocking of the social platform X in Brazil, a question that was raised by freedom lovers worldwide was the usage of VPN’s by Brazilian users to bypass this spurious prohibition.

This was highly anticipated by our Supreme Court overlords, who decided in a first moment to prohibit the usage of VPN, as well as instituting a 50k reals (over $9k) fine for using VPNs to access X.

This decision was later partially reformed, and that’s where the confusion started.

Some social media users (I saw it posted by DogeDesigner/@cb_doge and also by Charlie Kirk/@Charliekirk11) are suggesting that the fines for accessing X via VPN were rescinded – which would in fact be a victory for free speech.

But that is not the case – as much as I can find.

In fact, what changed is the previous decision to make VPN forbidden in Brazil. That is no longer the case, which is good news for the 75 million VPN users in Brazil.

But it is still forbidden to use this technology to access X, and the fines are still on, although there is some level of push back from the Order of Attorneys of Brazil (OAB).

Keep reading

Technofascism: The Government Pressured Tech Companies to Censor Users

“Internet platforms have a powerful incentive to please important federal officials, and the record in this case shows that high-ranking officials skillfully exploited Facebook’s vulnerability… Not surprisingly these efforts bore fruit. Facebook adopted new rules that better conformed to the officials’ wishes, and many users who expressed disapproved views about the pandemic or COVID–19 vaccines were ‘deplatformed’ or otherwise injured.”
—Justice Samuel Alito, dissenting in Murthy v. Missouri 

Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Meta, has finally admitted what we knew all along: Facebook conspired with the government to censor individuals expressing “disapproved” views about the COVID-19 pandemic.

Zuckerberg’s confession comes in the wake of a series of court rulings that turn a blind eye to the government’s technofascism.

In a 2-1 decision in Children’s Health Defense v. Meta, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a lawsuit brought by Children’s Health Defense against Meta Platforms for restricting CHD’s posts, fundraising, and advertising on Facebook following communications between Meta and federal government officials.

In a unanimous decision in the combined cases of NetChoice v. Paxton and Moody v. NetChoice, the U.S. Supreme Court avoided ruling on whether the states could pass laws to prohibit censorship by Big Tech companies on social media platforms such as Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube.

And in a 6-3 ruling in Murthy v. Missouri , the Supreme Court sidestepped a challenge to the federal government’s efforts to coerce social media companies into censoring users’ First Amendment expression.

Welcome to the age of technocensorship.

On paper—under the First Amendment, at least—we are technically free to speak.

In reality, however, we are now only as free to speak as a government official—or corporate entities such as Facebook, Google or YouTube—may allow.

Keep reading

Why the Telegram Prosecution May Move the Overton Window on Free Speech

Earlier this month, French authorities arrested Pavel Durov, the founder of Telegram, a chat app widely used around the world by nearly 1 billion people, including by political dissidents and terrorist groups. Some of the criminal charges, which are peculiar to French law, stem from allegations of clearly illegal and harmful material spread on the platform. But other charges, which relate to the mere use of encrypted technology, have set off wider concerns about a crackdown on free speech. To some extent, this has been led by the right, with Elon Musk pushing #freepavel on his X platform. But these worries have also been shared by journalists and civil-liberties groups worried about the encroachment of law enforcement on the way that people around the world communicate.,

To get a clearer sense of what is going on, I spoke with Daphne Keller, the director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center. Keller, who was previously an associate general counsel for Google on free-expression issues, has written that the charges are more likely to be focused on how illegal material is handled by big tech but could represent a broader threat to how we people communicate online.

Keep reading

Lula’s Leftist Party, PT Brasil, Continues to Post on X Despite Ban of Ordinary Citizens Using the Platform in the Country

The hypocrisy of these leftists never ceases to amaze… but wow, Lula’s government may have just taken the cake.

In one of the most brazen examples of “rules for thee, but not for me,” Brazilian President Lula’s ‘Workers Party’ continues to post repeatedly on X, despite yesterday’s implementation of Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes’ nationwide ban against the social media platform.

Hundreds of millions of citizens are now blocked from accessing their accounts after Lula’s feud with Elon Musk reached a tipping point on Friday when the socialist tyrant implemented the ban. Supposedly, the only way around this firewall is by using a VPN, however, if anyone is caught accessing the platform, they face heavy fines.

The ruling specifically mentioned Proton VPN, Express VPN, NordVPN, Surfshark, TOTALVPN, Atlas VPN, and Bitdefender VPN. De Moraes imposed fines of up to $8,874 a day for any user found using VPNs in Brazil.

Repeat offenders would likely face even worse repercussions. As has been demonstrated thoroughly, Brazil’s current government has proven it will go that extra mile to silence dissent.

This, however, is of no concern to the tyrants within the Lula regime. Since going into effect, ‘PT Brasil‘, the X account representing the ruling socialist party, has not skipped a beat in delivering its regularly scheduled lineup of propaganda.

Keep reading

Zuckerberg says Biden officials ‘pressured’ Meta to ‘censor’ content: What to know

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote a letter to the House Judiciary Committee saying he regrets not being more outspoken about “government pressure” from the Biden administration to “censor” content on its platforms.

“Like I said to our teams at the time, I feel strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any Administration in either direction,” he wrote in the letter.

Here’s what to know about the claims.

Keep reading

Elon Musk Fires Off Warning to Americans After Brazil Bans X

Elon Musk fired off a warning to Americans after radical Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes blocked X in Brazil.

The Brazilian Supreme Court Justice claimed he is banning X from Brazil because Elon Musk refused to name a legal representative to the country.

X’s Global Affairs disputed this Thursday evening.

“Soon, we expect Judge Alexandre de Moraes will order X to be shut down in Brazil – simply because we would not comply with his illegal orders to censor his political opponents. These enemies include a duly elected Senator and a 16-year-old girl, among others,” X’s Global Affairs said.

“When we attempted to defend ourselves in court, Judge de Moraes threatened our Brazilian legal representative with imprisonment. Even after she resigned, he froze all of her bank accounts. Our challenges against his manifestly illegal actions were either dismissed or ignored. Judge de Moraes’ colleagues on the Supreme Court are either unwilling or unable to stand up to him,” Global Affairs said.

Keep reading

Biden-Harris Administration is Probed for Potential Role in Telegram CEO Pavel Durov’s Arrest

America First Legal (AFL) is attempting to shed light on the role that the Biden-Harris administration may have played in the arrest of Telegram CEO Pavel Durov.

The French-Emirati citizen was arrested in France and charged with a large number of alleged crimes – in effect, failure to censor third-party content that can be qualified as criminal behavior. However, there is suspicion that the real reason is to force Telegram to censor all content, in the style of Google or Meta. The charges also attack encryption.

Announcing its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests regarding the US State Department’s possible involvement in the arrest, AFL noted that the encrypted app is one of the world’s largest, based on the premise of protecting its users’ free speech from what the non-profit dedicated to promoting the rule of law calls “government-sponsored” censorship.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

AFL cites statements made by Mike Benz, founder of the Foundation for Freedom Online and former State Department official, as the reason to suspect the current White House either had advance knowledge or has had its hand in the highly controversial arrest.

Keep reading

Here’s Why Democrats Want To Censor Grok’s AI Images

As we highlighted earlier this week, Democrats in the House are attempting to have the FEC issue rules to enable censorship of images created specifically by the Grok, the AI developed by Elon Musk’s X.

In other words, they want to eradicate memes they don’t like.

Why?

Because of threads such as the one below exposing how presenting actual policies and ways of fixing serious problems gets in the way of “joy.”

It doesn’t matter how bad things are, as long as you can inanely cackle and talk about choosing to be joyful.

Keep reading