The battle for free speech is on as Big Tech cracks down on conservatives on social media.

mark-zuckerberg-facebook-big-tech
No Fear: Big Tech Censors As They Aren’t Afraid of Us
The battle for free speech is on as Big Tech cracks down on conservatives on social media.

By Jenna Ellis

No Fear: Big Tech Censors As They Aren’t Afraid of Us


July 3, 2019

The battle for free speech on the internet is heating up and one thing is clear: Big Tech will bend to criticism from the left, but not the right.

The reason is simple. Silicon Valley does not fear any consequences from conservatives, who are instinctually prone to letting private companies do as they please.

Silicon Valley does not fear any consequences from conservatives, who are instinctually prone to letting private companies do as they please.

Meanwhile, because of the leftist inclinations of their own employees and their need to maintain a healthy relationship with their Democratic political protectors in Washington, the Big Tech companies are terrified of defying the activist left.

We are in the midst of an extensive crackdown on conservative speech by Facebook, Twitter, and Google’s YouTube. YouTube, for example is “demonetizing” and banning channels at an unprecedented rate, and in a complete reversal of its founding ethos, is also totally overhauling its policies to replace an emphasis on free speech with one on preventing “hateful content.”

The most immediate cause is direct pressure from left-wing activists who characterize their explicit efforts to deplatform the right as “journalism.” The YouTube policy changes, for instance, came in response to a coordinated media blitz over conservative comedian Steven Crowder making fun of Vox reporter Carlos Maza.

This network of activist-journalists works closely with groups like the Antifa gangsters who savagely beat Quillette editor Andy Ngo in Portland this weekend. After Ngo was attacked, some of these “journalists” mocked him and tried to justify his beating. Others, including Maza himself, have explicitly and publicly endorsed these violent tactics.

Yet, none of these leftist activists face censorship from Big Tech. In fact, the researcher who exposed their links to Antifa was himself banned from Twitter for doing so.
facebook
Facebook (Official White House Photo)

But now there’s a new dynamic at work. The federal government has begun making the long-awaited opening moves toward the most significant government action ever aimed at Silicon Valley, and Big Tech is paying attention.

The latest wave of censorship, unfortunately, shows that when Big Tech companies are under pressure, their instinct is to veer further left.

The Federal Trade Commission is opening an antitrust investigation into Facebook, and the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division is about to do the same for Google, but that’s not the end of Big Tech’s woes. Somewhere between 12 and 20 state attorneys general are reportedly prepping their own coordinated investigations into Big Tech’s anti-competitive practices and possible violations of state consumer protection laws.

The latest wave of censorship, unfortunately, shows that when Big Tech companies are under pressure, their instinct is to veer further left.

Even with the U.S. Department of Justice and top state law enforcers opening investigations, Silicon Valley remains far more responsive to the threats of Democrats, who are signalling that their own House Judiciary Committee investigation will be framed as a push towards more censorship, not less.

Representative Frank Pallone (D – NJ), who will be among the most prominent Democrats at the upcoming hearings, has already issued a threatening tweet urging more aggressive social media moderation beyond the censorship of conservatives that is already underway.

The last time Facebook executives appeared before her Senate committee, Senator Mazie Hirono (D – HI) similarly made it clear that she thinks the problem with social media is too little censorship, not too much.

Unfortunately, that’s the message Big Tech is responding to, egged on by a liberal press eager to silence competing sources of information. The New York Times, for example, ran a Sunday cover story last month about how YouTube turned a young man into a neo-Nazi, ostensibly through no fault of his own, by allowing voices such as Jordan Peterson and Lauren Southern on its platform.

This was always the activist left’s plan. Shortly after the 2016 election, Media Matters for America leader David Brock produced a memo explicitly calling for pressure on social media companies to deplatform conservatives in hopes that this would prevent a repeat of Trump’s upset victory. Thanks to reporting from Breitbart News and an undercover investigation by Project Veritas, we now know that senior elements within Google share the same goal.
trump-2020
Donald Trump MAGA Rally. The Epoch Times. Creative Commons. Flickr.

The Epoch Times. Creative Commons. Flickr.

The tide can still be turned, though. If the avalanche of antitrust investigations is not enough to convince Big Tech to clean up its act, then conservatives and elected Republicans will have to take an even stronger stand against biased censorship of the modern public square.

If the avalanche of antitrust investigations is not enough to convince Big Tech to clean up its act, then conservatives and elected Republicans will have to take an even stronger stand against biased censorship of the modern public square.

President Trump is setting the tone. He’s making it clear his administration will not sit on the sidelines with a summit on social media at the White House. “Twitter should let the banned Conservative Voices back onto their platform, without restriction. It’s called Freedom of Speech, remember. You are making a Giant Mistake!” the President tweeted in perhaps his strongest message to Big Tech yet.

We’re only at the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end, in this fight to preserve free speech on the internet. A huge part of that fight will involve the antitrust enforcement that’s starting to take shape, but conservatives can’t rely solely on federal regulators.

Elected Republicans, conservative activists, and the public at large need to follow Donald Trump’s lead and become far more invested in this issue by advocating loudly against censorship and seeking change through grassroots action, lawsuits, and legislation.

Democrats are already out ahead of us, with their 2020 presidential contenders competing fiercely to lock in Silicon Valley campaign contributions.

If conservatives can’t convince the social media giants that we can create as much pressure as the left exerts, Big Tech will continue to dismiss our concerns. They must fear the consequences of their assault on free speech, or else we will have to accept limits on our liberties.

Jenna Ellis (@realJennaEllis) is a member of the Trump 2020 Advisory Board. She is a constitutional law attorney, radio host, and the author of The Legal Basis for a Moral Constitution

South Dakota Mayor Responds After Settler’s Day Parade Includes Caged Obama and Hillary

20190620-215625-400610-highmorefloatsized-780x392
(The First Amendment isn’t there to protect ‘feelings.’)
South Dakota Mayor Responds After Settler’s Day Parade Includes Caged Obama and Hillary
The mayor is correct… this is exactly what the Independence Day celebration is all about—freedom to offend others with your personal ideas and beliefs.
by Georgette

South Dakota Mayor Responds After Settler’s Day Parade Includes Caged Obama and Hillary

The First Amendment isn’t there to protect ‘feelings.’
SIGN up for conservative daily post news alerts

At the fiftieth annual Settler’s Day celebration in Highmore, South Dakota, the people of the town take their constitutional rights literally.

After a float featuring a jailed Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama was seen in this year’s parade, some people were ‘offended.’

But, the Mayor of the town disagreed and explained that everyone has the right to the First Amendment!

The American Mirror reported:

Highmore’s 50th annual Settler’s Day is “just a wonderful time to get together and come back home,” Mayor Vikki Day said, but an interesting float at this year’s parade is giving some folks palpitations.

“I had to think about it with the mask of Obama, coming out as racist,” Jeff Damer, creator of the controversial float, told KSFY. “I just wanted to put it out there, it was just my view that they should be charged, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.”

Highmore, South Dakota’s 50th Annual Settler’s Day was a huge success this year.

“The float portrays former President Barack Obama in a cage with Hillary Clinton, while current President Donald Trump stands on the outside.” pic.twitter.com/5Wy4aDWDyP— Wojciech Pawelczyk (@PolishPatriotTM) June 24, 2019

The float featured a trailer with two people inside a cage wearing Obama and Clinton masks, the word “Guantanamo” spray-painted on a sign above. Another man wearing a President Trump mask stood outside the cell next to a makeshift wall with the words “Build the Wall.”

The trailer was ringed with numerous American flags, and featured Trump Make America Great Again flags flying from the rear gate.

Day told the news site the city received a lot of calls and messages from people complaining about the float, but officials don’t regret allowing Damer to participate in the parade.

“My stance, and the city’s stance is that every person has a right to the first amendment, to express his or her speech, and the expressions of it, we do not regulate that,” Day said.

South Dakota blogger Kevin Woster told KSFY he was among those whose feelings were hurt from the float.

“Well when I saw that, to me it was objectionable,” Woster said, adding that he’s since spoken to Damer about the display.

“We’ve stayed in contact, and I think we got to talking pretty good, and I think we’re making some progress,” he said.

Damer certainly isn’t the first local to lampoon liberal politicians during their hometown parade.

Aurora, Indiana resident Frank Linkemeyer crafted a parade float in 2016 for the Aurora Farmers Fair that depicted Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in an electric chair with Donald Trump flipping the switch, WCPO reports.

The float, pictures of which were shared online, was also adorned in Trump-Pence signs, a grim reaper, and an Easter Island-style statue of President Obama.

“It’s all in fun,” Linkemeyer told the Indianapolis Star. “Laughter is the best medicine and this country needs more laughter – and the people that are offended by it, I’m sorry. Don’t come to the parade next time.”

The Farmers Fair float followed a similarly “offensive” float in Amarillo, Texas by a group called Stars and Bars during the area’s Tri-State Parade in September 2016. That float featured Obama caged in a makeshift jail with Hillary Clinton, along with a man wearing a Make America Great Again flag as a cape and American flags streaming from the tow truck, KXXV reports.

That float, accompanied by the Confederate Riders of America, drew the ire of “a lot of people in the black and Hispanic community,” as well as the NAACP for allegedly racist connotations, locals told the news site.

A couple of months before, Don Christy drove a golf cart display at the 2016 Sheridan, Indiana Independence Day Parade that featured a stuffed “African lion” on the front and Obama on a toilet in the back, above the words “Royal Flush” and “Lying African.” The golf cart was lined with jail bars, with 73-year-old Christy wearing a prison jumpsuit and blond wig behind the wheel – presumably a reference to Hillary Clinton.

Christy decorated the top of the cart with Trump campaign signs and American flags, but said the message he was trying to convey was less about politics and more about common sense.

“I’m not a Democrat. I’m not a Republican,” he told the Star. “I’m a patriot.”

Christy said his float was aimed at pushing back on a culture of political correctness, and he pointed out he has as much of a right to express his views and his critics have to complain about them.

“It’s time to start changing our country back a little bit,” Christy said.

“I have my right to say things,” he continued. “Isn’t that what the Fourth of July’s about? Freedom.

“I apologize to anyone I offended, which would be a total liberal.”

Regardless of how someone ‘feels’ about the displays… the very ideals of the nation mean that these things can and should exist!

Censorship in America??? Chilling precedent? InfoWars block exposes Big Tech as no friend of free speech. Alex had been warning us of this for months, it is of no surprise, the only surprise is if we are going to take it!


HomeUS News
Chilling precedent? InfoWars block exposes Big Tech as no friend of free speech
Published time: 6 Aug, 2018 23:19
Edited time: 7 Aug, 2018 07:13
https://www.rt.com/usa/435271-alex-jones-inforwars-censorship/

Chilling precedent? InfoWars block exposes Big Tech as no friend of free speech
Alex Jones at a rally during the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio, July 18, 2016 © Lucas Jackson / Reuters

The US Constitution explicitly forbids government censorship. So Silicon Valley big-tech companies made themselves the gatekeepers of ‘goodthink,’ de-platforming anyone who runs afoul of their arbitrary ‘community standards.’

Alex Jones, the host of InfoWars, has often been derided by establishment media as a conspiracy theorist. Yet on Monday, Apple, Spotify, YouTube and Facebook proved right the motto of his show – “There’s a war on for your mind!” – by blocking or deleting InfoWars accounts from their platforms, saying he allegedly engaged in “hate speech” and violated their “community standards.”

Simply put, these corporations appointed themselves arbiters of acceptable political thought, and censored Jones for failing to comply with arbitrary political standards set in Silicon Valley boardrooms, not at the ballot box.

Whether you like @RealAlexJones and Infowars or not, he is undeniably the victim today of collusion by the big tech giants. What price free speech? https://t.co/DWroGYaWvk
— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) August 6, 2018

The First Amendment to the US Constitution says that Congress shall make no law “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” There is no “hate speech” exemption, either. In fact, hate speech is not even a legal category in the US. However, a chorus of voices all too glad Jones was purged immediately chimed up to argue that Apple, Alphabet, Facebook and Spotify are private companies and this does not apply to them.

There is a wrinkle in that argument, though: civil rights outfits such as the ACLU have argued that social media amount to a “designated public forum” in cases where government officials tried to avail themselves of blocking, muting and other functions put forth by Big Tech as a way to police “toxicity” on their platforms.

“When the government designates social media a public forum, the First Amendment prohibits it from limiting the discourse based on viewpoint,” the ACLU said in a brief submitted last year in a case before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia. “When a government actor bans critics from speaking in a forum, it silences and chills dissent, warps the public conversation, and skews public perception,” the ACLU brief went on.
Read more


© Adrees Latif Censorship or justice? Twitter debate rages over tech giants’ simultaneous InfoWars ban

In a separate but obviously related case, a federal judge used the “designated public forum” definition to demand that President Donald Trump allow critics access to his personal Twitter account – not the official @POTUS one – because he is a public official.

However, if social media platforms are a “designated public forum” that government is not allowed to exclude people from on First Amendment grounds, how is it OK for corporations that operate these platforms to do so? Or is chilling dissent, warping conversation and skewing perception only bad when a government actor does it, thereby creating a legal system in which the what is irrelevant, and the only thing that matters is who/whom?

There is something deeply cynical about people who until yesterday denounced discrimination and evil corporatism – and will do so again tomorrow – suddenly defending private property and freedom to discriminate against political viewpoints. That’s because this isn’t about principles, but about power.

Liberals were once all for free speech, starting a movement by that name at Berkeley in the 1960s. Now that the media and academia overwhelmingly march in lockstep with the Democratic Party, however, they’re all about “no-platforming” opposing views and calling them “hate speech,” all in an effort to limit the range of permissible thought and expression in America.

Alex Jones’ Warning To The World On Internet Censorship pic.twitter.com/DNdiR6goHb

— Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) August 6, 2018

This has manifested in many forms, from literal riots in Berkeley to “shadowbanning” of several Republican lawmakers on Twitter. That platform, which has so far refrained from banning InfoWars, didn’t hesitate to block conservative African-American activist Candace Owens after she pointedly echoed the hateful tweets of a liberal journalist hired by the New York Times. Needless to say, the same people up in arms about Alex Jones argued that Sarah Jeong’s tweets were fine, because one “cannot be racist against white people.”

If Infowars has been removed for pushing conspiracy theories and “glorifying violence and hate speech…”

Then what’s the plan for outlets who still push ‘Russian collusion’ and promote violent ANTIFA protests/harassing Trump admin officials?
— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) August 6, 2018

This ideological conflict in American society actually goes back years, maybe even decades. However, the victory of Trump over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election, even though most of the media and all of the Silicon Valley were #WithHer, flushed it out in the open. Democrats quickly latched onto a claim of “Russian meddling,” intended to delegitimize Trump’s presidency but also, as it turns out, create an excuse for corporate censorship.

Consider the November 1, 2017 hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, where lawyers for Google, Facebook and Twitter were subjected to a barrage of demands to regulate their platforms against “Russians” – or else.

“You have to be the ones to do something about it, or we will,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California). She also pressed for the removal of RT from YouTube, only to have a Google representative say that despite looking very hard, the company hasn’t found any policy violations that would justify such a move.

“I’m not really satisfied with that,” said Feinstein.
Read more
YouTube is also banning channels unrelated to the InfoWars brand, but have livestreamed Jone’s show daily. © Dado Ruvic/Reuters War on InfoWars? YouTube shuts down Alex Jones’ channel with 2.5mn subscribers

Now, imagine how much more chilling this would be if Feinstein represented the ruling party, rather than the opposition. It isn’t that far-fetched: during the 2016 election, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg told Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta that she “badly” wanted Clinton to win, while Eric Schmidt, the executive chairman of Google’s parent company Alphabet, actually spent election night at Clinton HQ with a “staff” badge. More recently, this April actually, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey described as a “great read” an article describing how Democrats should fight and win the “civil war” currently being waged in the US.

This isn’t about how much one likes or dislikes Alex Jones or InfoWars. This is about corporations deciding for you what you should be allowed to hear, read, say or think – and the people normally criticizing such behavior cheering it on, because it suits their political agenda.

As Jones’s colleague Paul Joseph Watson put it, “The great censorship purge has truly begun.”

Ask not for whom the censorship bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

Nebojsa Malic, RT

CIA/FBI/DOJ Plot To Overthrow The President Of The United States


CIA/FBI/DOJ Plot To Overthrow The President Of The United States

http://www.investmentwatchblog.com/cia-fbi-doj-plot-to-overthrow-the-president-of-the-united-states/

On July 21, I posted on my website a report on the discovery by John Solomon of The Hill magazine that Lisa Page testified to a congressional committee to the effect that the Russiagate probe conducted by Robert Mueller is a cover-up operation to obscure the criminal use of counterintelligence capabilities to spy on Trump’s presidential campaign and then to sabotage Trump’s presidency.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/07/21/bombshell-development-lisa-page-reveals-plot-against-trump/

The evidence is overwhelming that CIA director John Brennan, FBI director James Comey, Robert Mueller, James Clapper, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and the Democratic National Committee are engaged in high treason against the American people and the President of the United States and are actively engaged in a plot to overthrow the President of the United States. Yet, the traitorous intelligence officials retain their high security clearances and have not been indicted, arrested, and put on trial for high treason. Rosenstein and Mueller haven’t even been fired from their high positions where they continue to operate in behalf of the overthrow plot.

It shows the untouchable power of the military/security complex when its operatives are so far beyond the reach of law and accountability that they can commit high treason with no consequences to themselves.

The US presstitute media works full time to protect these traitors, because the presstitutes hate Donald Trump and the Americans who elected him much more than they love the US Constitution and the rule of law. This makes the presstitutes accomplices to high treason and subject to arrest and prosecution.

Even those who understand what is going on and are willing to speak against it, such as former CIA official Ray McGovern http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49903.htm and Senator Rand Paul speak in muted terms. Senator Paul wants their security clearances withdrawn because they are monetizing them in their roles of well-paid talking heads in the presstitute media and may reveal classified information on the programs.

There is no evidence that Trump is a Russian agent. There is enormous evidence that the above CIA, FBI, DOJ, and national security officials are engaged in treason against the United States.

Yet, we hear only about the fake case that Trump is a Russian agent. We hear nothing about the CIA/FBI/DOJ plot against the president of the United States that is unfolding before our eyes in plain sight of even insouciant Americans.

We also don’t hear anything about this: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49898.htm
Former CIA Officer: Clinton “Involved In Biggest Treason In History”

By Greg Hunter

July 20, 2018 “Information Clearing House” – Former CIA Officer and whistleblower Kevin Shipp says what Hillary Clinton did with her charity and Uranium One while she was Secretary of State was a crime for the history books. Shipp explains, “Hillary Clinton used this to launder money in foreign banks so it wasn’t subject to U.S. laws, congressional subpoenas or FOIA demands for the evidence. This was done to launder this money globally into the Clinton Foundation so the U.S. government could not examine it at all.”

Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller was the head of the FBI while the Uranium One deal was being done by Clinton and the Russians. One fifth of U.S. uranium production was bought by the Russians in a deal Clinton pushed and approved. The Clinton Foundation received more than $140 million from some of the same Russian players who were involved with Uranium One. Why didn’t Mueller stop the deal? Shipp says, “Mueller is either a complete moron, which he is not, or he overlooked the biggest counterterrorism cases in U.S. history. It involved Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, Uranium One and, of course, the destruction of all the emails and evidence and her secret server, and on and on and on it goes, and he (Mueller) ignored it all.”

Donald Trump to Supporters: ‘Stick with Us’ and Ignore ‘Crap’ from ‘Fake News’ and ‘Lobbyists’

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/24/donald-trump-to-supporters-stick-with-us-and-ignore-crap-from-fake-news-and-lobbyists/

President Donald Trump arrives to speak during the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States National Convention on, Tuesday, July 24, 2018, in Kansas City, Mo. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
(AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

President Donald Trump urged supporters not to lose faith with his administration on tariffs on Tuesday, criticizing the news coverage of his efforts to fight for fair trade policies.

“Folks, stick with us, stick with us,” Trump said during a speech during the VFW convention in St. Louis, Missouri.

Trump appeared frustrated by the news coverage of his attempts to get a better deal with foreign countries on trade, blaming it on lobbyists.

“Remember that they have the biggest, best, strongest lobbyists and they’re doing a number,” Trump said. “Just stick with us, don’t believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news.”

The audience cheered Trump and booed the news media in response.

Trump blasted an NBC news report that featured critics of his trade fight.

“That piece was done by the lobbyists and by the people that they hire, it was a total set up,” Trump said, clarifying that CNN was still “the worst.”

He argued the current economic climate was a good time to enact tariffs.

“This country is doing better than it’s ever done before economically,” Trump said. “This is the time to take off the rip off of tariffs, we have to do it.”

Media Fail: Trump’s Approval Rating Improved During Manufactured Border Outrage


This sign holder displayed the extreme accusation in front of the White House (Credit: Michelle Moons/Breitbart News)

Media Fail: Trump’s Approval Rating Improved During Manufactured Border Outrage
Michelle Moons
https://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2018/07/03/media-fail-trumps-approval-rating-improved-during-manufactured-border-outrage/

President Trump’s job approval rating improved by five points during the establishment media’s manufactured outrage over Trump continuing the Obama administration’s policy of separating illegal alien adults from children at the border.

According to the Real Clear Politics poll of polls, on June 8, Trump’s approval rating rounded out to an average of 42 percent, while his disapproval rating averaged 54 percent — a 12 point gap.

As of Monday July 2, after two weeks of being pounded by the entire media over border enforcement, Trump’s approval rating has climbed to 44 percent, and his disapproval rating has dropped to 51 percent — a seven point gap.

That is a five point improvement during the very “scandal” the media predicted would be remembered as “Trump’s Katrina,” meaning the issue that drove public approval of the president into the dirt forever.

Part of that improvement is due to ten point surge in support from — wait for it, wait for it — Hispanic Americans.

Imagine being the establishment media today, imagine knowing you threw everything you had at the president; that you coordinated a perfect narrative-storm using recordings of crying children and hoax photographs; that you poured all your hopes, your dreams, and resources into manufacturing that one bulletproof story that would finally bring this guy down.

And what happened in the end…?

Not only is Trump in better shape now than before this fake news jihad, the public is increasingly siding with him on border and immigration issues, (including 51 percent support for the wall).

Meanwhile, the establishment media has once again been exposed as inept liars and clueless propagandists.

The media have lost all of their moral authority, lost the thing that mattered to them most — the ability to move and shape public opinion, and these last few weeks were basically the Battle of the Bulge, an all-out assault by the bad guys in a desperate move to turn the tide of the war — and the bad guys lost again.

Before the media fabricated this border hoax, before the media tried to blame a mass-shooting on Trump, a full 72 percent of all Americans already believed the media intentionally misled them with fake news.

Like Trump’s job approval number, that number has probably increased, as well.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

desertradio Desert Musings on The Arpaio Pardon

Back
VISIT SITE

The Arpaio Pardon

12h ago

While the left wing snowflakes of the world tell us all oh, how terrible Donald Trump’s pardon of former Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s pardon was, and that he should hang for his contempt of court charges (most of which most of them have been guilty of as well), let’s examine this from what we always do around here…the truth.

You know I’m a big consistency guy. What’s good for one is good for another, regardless, right? So, let’s examine if Trump indeed should be banished to hell forever for this dastardly deed. First of all, it was a very liberal judge that found Apraio in contempt. In most cases, judges of this sort (well, normal, sane minded judges anyway) would have recused themselves from the case. That wasn’t the issue here. In a scene reminiscent of Loretta Lynch meeting Bubba Clinton on an airport tarmac, this judge felt they could actually put personal feelings aside. Now, this is strange, since personal feelings is what rules the snowflake left. Anyway, Arpaio is found guilty of contempt of court (that’s something every TV lawyer has been found guilty of as well!).

Trump pardon’s him, as he is legally able to do. And he is called on the carpet for it by the snowflakes. They feel it was “treasonous”. OK, let’s look at that. Is it treasonous to not charge a member of the armed forces that walked off his post, and joined the enemy…then was swapped out so that not one, but five prisoners from Gitmo who were there because they were the worst of the worst terrorists on the planet? Is that a treasonous act? Is it treasonous to call that member of the armed forces a “hero”, as the Attorney General at the time did? MUCH closer than pardoning someone for contempt of court.

When compared to the 78 documented cases of law breaking and yes, treason that Barack Obama committed during his time in office, you are going to tell me that Donald Trump is treasonous on this occasion? Really? Let’s even go back to Bill Clinton. Was it an offense that you should be screaming about that he pardons his own brother from prior drug convictions?

It’s time the snowflake left wake up and realize a couple of things. First of all, what comes around goes around, and your treatment of Donald Trump will certainly impact the presidency of the next snowflake elected. Do you think you can get away with this type of treatment, and expect us to “come together as a nation” and say “the time of divide is over” because your guy won? No, it is going to be thrust upon you in the same manner in which you’ve thrusted it upon Trump. You’ve been as unfair and unjust to this president as any partisan group has of any president in the history of our country. You have mistreated, maligned, and abused every breath this guy took without once thinking what we’re going to do to your next elected president. And you damn well better not say one bad word about it! We have the video and audio of how you treated this guy. It WILL be paid back in spades!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!