Social Media Purge of Conservatives, Libertarians Heats Up in February


President Obama’s “secret” meeting at MIT is no longer secret. The former president again hit at Google and Facebook for allowing so-called fake news to perpetuate. He included a dig at Fox News once again. Variety put up an article in which Jeff Zucker complains that fake news on Google and Facebook is hurting CNN [try not to laugh at that one.] Zucker wants regulators to probe. Hillary is out and about complaining that Facebook charged her more for ads She said that they hurt her chances to win and affected the “Democratic process”.

There is a reason for all this and it’s not good.

This is the new front in the civil war against liberty. All of Social Media is shutting down Conservative and Libertarian speech. Prager University has an important lawsuit against YouTube as do others. One YouTube channel that was shut down was Bombard’s body language which had 265k followers. It was very popular but Bombard made the mistake of hitting the leftist youth movement under the Hogg. There are others being taken down.

The leftists of social media are going for the little guys first.

Look at what one of my Twitter friends had to delete because he was told it was “hate speech”.

How is this hate speech?

Here are some statistics on young black male deaths: The Facts and More Facts. My friend’s stats on black genocide might be off a bit or not, but the point is accurate. The statistics actually depend on the state. It’s higher in some, check here.

I had to delete the article on this link after Facebook threatened me. I rewrote it but it probably won’t be up long.


  1. (Stats on black male deaths/black pregnancies…)

    My guess is it’s their default, call it “hate speech” to shut it down, because it’s the truth and they don’t want it out there.

  2. Ted Cruz, in a hearing with the tech giants, essentially put them on notice because they are “protected” by law as neutral public fora and thus not subject to lawsuits. The representative from YouTube specifically stated the guidelines are provided to the users but I would state if their is NO definition of how and what was violated then the guidelines are moot. Given they are in violation of their protection it is time for a large class-action lawsuit with substantial damages.

  3. Another factor in this discussion is the ambiguous idea of online “information”, which is specified as disinformation. And This is the reference Trey Gowdy made in a hearing, and the primary reason I am highly suspicious of him. For someone to make such remarks with an extensive legal education puts into question what is taught in law schools. Who is to determine what IS disinformation. Certainly the Democrats will call anything a Republican says qualifies as “disinformation”. This social media uproar is a case in point.

    Once we enter the gambit of repressing one person’s speech where will it end. It actually could result in the downfall of the platforms themselves. More and more people may get so fed up the abandon it entirely.

Comments are closed.