Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

BREAKING: Rep. Matt Gaetz Filing Federal Complaint Against Twitter After He Caught Them Red-Handed

Published

on

Social networking giant Twitter is finding itself in serious hot water as Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) filed a Federal Election Commission (FEC) complaint against the company. This follows the revelation Twitter shadow banned his account.

Shadow banning is the act of blocking a user or their content from an online community such that it will not be readily apparent to the user that they have been banned. This, in turn, makes the user’s comments or posts invisible or significantly less prominent to other users of the online community, in this case, Twitter in hopes that the lack of response or reaction to their comments will bore or frustrate the user and they will eventually leave the site.

Just two days after Twitter told Congress that they absolutely and emphatically are not politically biased when censoring content, several prominent conservatives discovered that the social media giant automatically includes them in a site-wide “Quality Filter Discrimination” shadowban which prevent anyone not already following them from viewing their posts.

Screenshots materialized earlier this week showing the Florida Republican’s account would not autocomplete in search results. The lawmaker’s office said it was “investigating the depths and impact,” of the serious allegations, noting his Twitter engagement/growth was down by 75% after Twitter changed its algorithm in May.

The office of Rep. Gaetz also commented on the suppression of the Congressman’s accounts stating – “Our office is aware of claims that Twitter has discriminated against multiple accounts maintained by Congressman Gaetz. We are investigating the depths and impact of these serious charges. It is curious that these allegations would arise the week following Congressman Gaetz’s heated exchange with Twitter senior executives before the House Judiciary Committee. Congressman Gaetz continues to believe that interactive computer services, such as Twitter, should not discriminate against content while simultaneously asserting that they are a nonbiased public forum under federal law.”

Gaetz, a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, stated upon discovery of the shadowban of his Twitter account – “The evidence is piling up that I am being treated differently on Twitter than people on the political Left and I don’t like that because I enjoy the Twitter platform, I enjoy the engagement, I enjoy the candor. I would think that having won my election with 69 percent of the vote to serve in the Congress that the marketplace of ideas could accommodate my views.”

Gaetz believes an FEC complaint is necessary arguing that if his political opponents have better access to the Twitter platform than he does, then it provides his political rivals an unfair advantage by not giving equal visibility. He explains it is no different than a company refusing to provide billboard, radio, or television time for one party over another.

Gaetz adds – “So I believe that Twitter may have illegally donated to the campaigns of my opponents by prejudicing against my content.”

Appearing on the Fox News Channel’s Tucker Carlson Tonight, Gaetz confirmed to host Tucker Carlson that an FEC complaint was officially filed against Twitter.

Gaetz stated to Carlson – “I’m certain there were only four members of Congress who had their voices suppressed on Twitter: Matt Gaetz, Jim Jordan Mark Meadows, and Devin Nunes. My suspicion is if people were effetely communicating a conservative message, they got caught in Twitter’s troll trap.”

Speaking on the effectiveness of the FEC complaint against the social networking giant, Gaetz emphatically stated his belief that the FEC can effectively and punitively address this attempt to censor certain ideologies and political beliefs. Gaetz told Tucker – The FEC can “absolutely then institute fines, just like they can institute fines and punish against any company that illegally makes a corporate donation to a political campaign.”

It seems Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey may have pushed his apparent anti-conservative agenda just a little too far as the evidence continues to mount – even among the left-leaning mainstream media – that Twitter has been shadowbanning various prominent and influential Conservatives on the social media site, thus limiting the number of people able to view content from those affected by the shadow ban. Twitter initially tried to deny claims of shadowbanning by explicitly stating that they do not engage in the practice. Except they then went on to offer a detailed description of how they do exactly that.

Twitter’s aggressive censorship of conservative accounts was noticed Thursday afternoon by the Daily Wire’s Ryan Saavedra after he noticed a significant reduction in activity and engagement directly following a viral tweet with 3.85 million views in which Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-D) called for the public harassment and public confrontation of members of the Trump administration. Using an account checking tool at shadowban.eu, a significant amount of influential conservative Twitter users discovered they too were shadowbanned.

On Wednesday an article in the left-leaning VICE confirmed Saavedra’s report revealing that Twitter has indeed been shadow banning conservative users limiting who can engage or view their content. Twitter executives initially attempted to blame a site-wide “Quality Filter Discrimination” for the shadow bans, which they claim prevents anyone not already following a user from viewing their posts. Yet Vice noted that many conservative accounts simply are not found when typing names into the Twitter search engine.

“The Republican Party’s chair Ronna McDaniel, several conservative Republican Congressmen, and Donald Trump Jr.’s spokesman no longer appear in the auto-populated drop-down search box on Twitter, VICE News has learned. It’s a shift that diminishes their reach on the platform — and the same one being deployed against prominent racists to limit their visibility. The profiles continue to appear when conducting a full search — but not in the more convenient and visible drop-down bar. (The accounts appear to also populate if you already follow the person.)”

Vice found the same was not true for Democrats, stating –

“Democrats are not being “shadow banned” in the same way, according to a VICE News review. McDaniel’s counterpart, Democratic Party chair Tom Perez, and liberal members of Congress — including Reps. Maxine Waters, Joe Kennedy III, Keith Ellison, and Mark Pocan — all continue to appear in drop-down search results. Not a single member of the 78-person Progressive Caucus faces the same situation in Twitter’s search.”

Saavedra also noted that “Vile anti-Semite and Hitler worshipper Louis Farrakhan is NOT shadowbanned.”

Meanwhile, Gaetz and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes (CA-R) took to Twitter mocking the company’s attempts to “explain” and effectively deny that said shadowbanning was taking place in a series of tweets.

Nunes tweets – “Feeling good about ⁦@Twitter⁩ explaining how I wasn’t shadow banned…”

Gaetz responded – “It was apparently our “behavior” that got us treated differently?”

To which Nunes promptly tweeted back with – “Sorry @mattgaetz I can’t see you in the shadows…who are you??”

Comedic effort aside, this is frightening and if one knows history at all? We have been here before. It did not end well. As George Orwell notes in 1984 – “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

WATCH: Alec Baldwin tells donors to ‘Overthrow’ Trump at Democrat Fundraiser

Published

on

...

* By

These Hollywood lunatics don’t seem to get it. The more they make threats towards our President..The more they fire up the American people. So please..keep it up. That giant red tsunami is coming in November.

Baldwin’s career is so in the gutter that the only job he can get is being unfunny on SNL.

Oh..and by the way..‘The Alec Baldwin Show’ Premiere Totally Bombs. Breitbart has more on that story.

From Fox News:

MANCHESTER, N.H. – Less than 24 hours after reprising his Emmy Award-winning parody of President Trump on “Saturday Night Live,” Alec Baldwin took aim at the president again.

“In an orderly and formal way, and lawful way, we need to overthrow the government of the United States under Donald Trump,” Baldwin said Sunday night at a major fundraising dinner for New Hampshire’s Democratic Party.

“I flew here this morning after doing ‘Saturday Night Live’ last night,” the actor, comedian and longtime liberal political activist told a crowd of some 800 party office-holders, candidates, officials and activists, drawing loud applause.

Baldwin said his role as Trump on “SNL” wasn’t supposed to last as long as it has.

“‘Just three shows,’ he said,” Baldwin recalled “SNL” producer Lorne Michaels saying as he tried to convince the actor to portray then-candidate Trump. “‘Till the election,’ he said. ‘Then he’ll be gone,’ he said. ‘Three shows. It will be fun,’ he said.”

But Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election resulted in an extension of Baldwin’s run on the late-night comedy show – including this weekend’s opening sketch about Trump’s recent meeting with rapper Kanye West.

Turning serious, Baldwin then rallied the crowd to vote in next month’s midterm elections, saying “this election and the one that follows in 2020 will be the most consequential elections since the election of FDR.”

He added: “It is time to overthrow the government of Donald Trump — not in a violent way or unlawful way — but it must be overthrown nonetheless.”

Baldwin ended his nearly 20-minute-long speech by putting his own spin on the president’s famous campaign slogan.

“Let’s make America great again by making Donald Trump a casino operator again,” he said.

“Let’s make America great again by making Donald Trump a casino operator again.” — Alec Baldwin

Some New Hampshire Republicans criticized the state’s Democrats for choosing Baldwin as their keynote speaker. They pointed to Baldwin’s past problematic behavior, including making abusive comments to and about women, and making homophobic remarks.

Taking questions from reporters after his speech, Baldwin didn’t directly answer.

“Most of the time people are trying to tar me with a brush about defending Woody Allen,” he said, referring to the filmmaker who has long faced allegations of sexual assault, which he has denied.

Baldwin also told reporters that he’s “always dreamed” of running for office himself, but explained it’s not in the cards for him at this time.

“My wife told me she’d divorce me if I ran for office,” he joked.

He also downplayed suggestions that his Democratic activism would limit the success of “The Alec Baldwin Show,” his new venture on ABC.

Baldwin has long been a backer of Democratic candidates and causes. He famously declared that he’d move to Canada if then-Texas Gov. George Bush won the 2000 presidential election. Though Bush did win, Baldwin didn’t move.

More recently, Baldwin campaigned last year for Democrat Ralph Northam in Virginia’s hotly contested gubernatorial election. And last November he headlined the Iowa Democrats’ major fall fundraising gala.

New Hampshire is the state that holds the first presidential primary every four years — and Sunday night’s dinner over the years has been a key stop for potential Democratic White House hopefuls.

Baldwin previously made headlines in June when he told radio host Howard Stern that if he made a 2020 presidential bid, he would beat Trump.

“If I ran, I would win,” Baldwin said. “I would absolutely win.”

Baldwin said Sunday that if he had decided to run, “I thought it would be such a pleasure to go around the country and try to remind people that, Let’s get back to a time of common sense.”

But Baldwin said he’s not very optimistic when he considers the potential field of Democrats vying for the party’s presidential nomination in 2020.

“I’m hoping that someone that isn’t necessarily on the horizon right now would materialize,” Baldwin said, “because I don’t think anybody that’s a frontrunner now of the top six, seven, eight names that I’ve seen, I don’t think any of them is going to have an easy time of it.”

He also took another shot at the president.

“Every day I wake up, I still am horrified,” he said. “I feel like I’m in some dream that Trump is president of the United States. I almost can’t even say it.”

Continue Reading

BREAKING: Federal Judge Dismisses Stormy Daniels’ Defamation Lawsuit Against Donald Trump

Published

on

...

* By

This is breaking right now. A federal judge has dismissed Stormy Daniels’ defamation lawsuit against Trump, and said that Trump is entitled to legal fees from her.

Trump has emerged victorious!

The Washington Times is reporting:

“A judge has dismissed the defamation lawsuit brought against President Trump by a porn star who claims to have had an affair with him.

According to a Fox News report, the judge also ordered the porn actress, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford and who has been represented by attorney Michael Avenatti, to pay Mr. Trump’s legal fees — customarily, a rebuke of a lawsuit ever being brought.

“No amount of spin or commentary by Stormy Daniels or her lawyer Mr. Avenatti can truthfully characterize today’s ruling in any way other than total victory for President Trump and total defeat for Stormy Daniels,” said Trump attorney Charles Harder in a statement issued by the White House.”

Stormy’s lawyer, Michael Avenatti responded:

“Re Judge’s limited ruling: Daniels’ other claims against Trump and Cohen proceed unaffected. Trump’s contrary claims are as deceptive as his claims about the inauguration attendance.

We will appeal the dismissal of the defamation cause of action and are confident in a reversal.”

The Hollywood Reporter also reported:

“A judge sees Trump’s tweet about a “con job” as “rhetorical hyperbole” and orders the porn queen to pay his attorneys fees.

First Amendment.

Stormy Daniels was the plaintiff in this one.

She not only sued Trump to invalidate a hush agreement over an alleged affair, but in the midst of the controversy, her attorney Michael Avenatti sheparded a claim over one of Trump’s tweets.

Last April, Avenatti released a sketch of a man who allegedly threatened Daniels into remaining silent back in 2011. Trump tweeted, “A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!”

In response, Trump moved to have the complaint stricken under Texas’ anti-SLAPP statute, which provides special protection against frivolous litigation usurping one’s free speech activity. Charles Harder, his attorney, argued that the statement at issue represented protected opinion and that Daniels hadn’t sufficiently alleged damages nor stated facts to show Trump acted with actual malice.

U.S. District Court Judge S. James Otero concludes that Daniels has failed to establish a prima facie case for defamation.

“The Court agrees with Mr. Trump’s argument because the tweet in question constitutes ‘rhetorical hyperbole’ normally associated with politics and public discourse in the United States,” states the opinion. “The First Amendment protects this type of rhetorical statement.”

The judge continues by defining “rhetorical hyperbole” as “extravagant exaggeration employed for rhetorical effect” and characterizes Trump’s tweet as displaying “an incredulous tone, suggesting that the content of his tweet was not meant to be understood as a literal statement about Plaintiff. Instead, Mr. Trump sought to use language to challenge Plaintiff’s account of her affair and the threat that she purportedly received in 2011. As the United States Supreme Court has held, a published statement that is ‘pointed, exaggerated, and heavily laden with emotional rhetoric and moral outrage’ cannot constitute a defamatory statement.”

Otero adds that Trump made a “one-off rhetorical comment, not a sustained attack on the veracity of Plaintiff’s claims” and that this distinguishes this suit from other cases where courts have seen enough to deem defamation from a public statement. The judge adds that Daniels’ assumption that Trump knew of the 2011 threat doesn’t establish facts adding up that he did, in fact, know about the threat. The judge ends up agreeing with Trump that Daniels hasn’t shown actual malice nor adequately pled damages.

Daniels won’t get the opportunity to amend her complaint to cure deficiencies, and what’s more under Texas’ anti-SLAPP statute, she now has to pay Trump’s legal costs — perhaps a rubbing of salt in the wound to those who contributed to Daniels’ legal defense fund. However, she does have a right to pursue an appeal.

UPDATE: In a tweet following publication of this story, Avenatti attempted to frame the ruling as “limited” and said it wouldn’t affect her other claims looking to invalidate the contract. (There, Trump offered her a covenant not to sue and is arguing a court no longer has jurisdiction to entertain that controversy.) Avenatti added, “We will appeal the dismissal of the defamation cause of action and are confident in a reversal.””

A little history on the lawsuit:

A U.S. federal judge in Los Angeles on Monday appeared poised to throw out adult film actress Stormy Daniel’s defamation lawsuit against President Donald Trump on free-speech grounds, Reuters reported.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, sued the president in April over a tweet in which he denied her claims of being subtly threatened by a man in a Las Vegas parking lot in 2011.”

“Daniels said the man was threatening her for going public about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump in 2006. Trump has denied the affair took place, and cast doubt on her story of being threatened.

“A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!” Trump tweeted.

Daniels’ attorney Michael Avenatti said the tweet damaged her credibility by portraying her as a liar. Trump’s attorneys have asked a federal judge in Los Angeles to dismiss the suit.

“The question is whether the tweet by the president is protected communication or political hyperbole and non-defamatory on its face,” U.S. District Judge James Otero said during Monday’s hearing.

“He’s a public official, he’s president of the United States, so it doesn’t get much higher than that,” Otero said. “It’s free speech by a public official on a matter of public concern.”

He continued, “(Allowing) the complaint to go forward and to have one consider this to be defamatory in the context it was made would have a chilling effect,” Otero said during the hearing.

Avenatti told reporters he expects a ruling within days and plans to appeal if the suit is dismissed.

Otero scheduled a hearing Dec. 3 to discuss Trump’s efforts to dismiss another lawsuit by Daniels over a hush-money agreement related to their alleged affair.

Daniels sued Trump and his former lawyer Michael Cohen, who negotiated the deal, so she could speak publicly about the alleged affair without fear of reprisal. Cohen had threatened to sue her for $20 million.”

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend