AG Barr fires shots at tech giants & corrupt mail-in voting


Attorney General Bill Barr addressed the censorship of certain viewpoints by social media. They’re not simply publishers any longer and changes need to be made. That is why he suggested a change to Section 230 but Congress has to do it. They are no longer publishers if they censor viewpoints, he explained.

He also addressed the censoring of ads. Accounts are deleted entirely over ads and differing viewpoints. Barr said it was a bait-and-switch. In the beginning, these tech giants claimed all viewpoints are accepted. However, once they became wealthy and powerful, they started censoring viewpoints. Barr didn’t mention it, but every fact-checker for Facebook has some tie to George Soros.

Our Republic was founded on diverse voices, Barr said, to prevent any faction from growing so big that it could suppress a minority. These big concentrations of power in social media can push people in one direction and do so quickly.

One way to address this is by using anti-trust laws.


Barr also talked about the fraud of mail-in ballots. Problems with mail-in ballots include the fact that they can be taken out of mailboxes, they eliminate private voting, a foreign country could print up millions of ballots, and so on. If anything, we should tighten up laws, he said, not compromise the integrity of the election.

He didn’t mention this example, but in Michigan, everyone is getting mail-in ballots and anyone could change the address.


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
3 years ago

Of course it’s a concern for us! But in the Dictator Capitol (DC) criminals are not prosecuted, they’re revered unless you PO the globalists! Then the globalists shame them into silence. Have you heard a Republican in Senate or Congress say anything negative about the peaceful protesters? (sarc)

The Prisoner
The Prisoner
3 years ago

OK, so he does not like some things, and does nothing about it, what good does that do the nation? He mentions vote fraud and censorship, are those not concrete concerns which the DOJ should act on?