Please do not forget about the RESTRICT Act. It’s still under consideration. Call your congressmen and tell them to vote it down. Please read about it below, but first, you should watch a very cagey Lindsey Graham play dumb.
Lindsey Graham can’t seem to remember that he co-sponsored the Restrict Act.
Are you SERIOUS? Look at this deep-state RINO trying to BS us—there’s NO WAY…He CO-SPONSORED THE BILL!!! https://t.co/AS0WphLxWU
— WeLoveTrump (@WeLovePresTrump) March 30, 2023
As you read through the vague and broad bill, you might suspect it is more about blocking free speech and accessing all your private data.
The Restrict Act (S.686), dubbed the Ban TikTok Act, is not about banning TikTok as much as controlling American free speech. It was introduced by a Democrat, Sen. Mark Warner, and a Republican, Sen. John Thune, and that’s as far as it has gotten.
The Restrict Act would allow the Feds access to all the data on our devices, including Ring and home security apps… it’ll be a crime to use a privacy device. If you use a VPN, you could get 20 years in prison and a million-dollar fine on the say-so of the Secretary of Commerce.
All Internet users would lose their right to privacy. The government could freely, and without your permission, review, prosecute, and take possession of your personal information. They can ban any game, application, or anything.
The law is vague, and with this kind of power, the federal government could silence free speech with little effort.
Tulsi Gabbard warned of the danger this bill represents:
“People should pay really close attention to the RESTRICT Act because the Democrats and Republicans who have introduced this legislation are trying to market it as something that it is not. It does ban TikTok, and it makes it illegal for Americans to use TikTok, but it does a whole lot more than that.it gives power, unfettered power, to un-elected bureaucrats in the Commerce Department to tell us what social media apps we are or are not allowed to use.
It gives them unfettered access to our data, our browsing histories, how we’re using different apps on our phones, and it basically criminalizes the use of [virtual private networks] VPNs, with some pretty serious consequences. And they’re doing all this in the name of “national security.”
Now, this sounds a whole lot like what we saw with the PATRIOT Act. We as the American people need to be smart enough not to fall into this trap again where ultimately, we have, again, people who took an oath to support and defend the Constitution, our civil liberties, our rights, but they are hell-bent on taking those rights away. And dangerously in this bill, the RESTRICT Act, not even allowing us to challenge their actions through our court system. This is a very serious bill that threatens the very foundation of our democracy and our God-given rights that are enshrined in the Constitution.
We cannot allow them to do this again.”
It’s a communist manifesto.
I do not think Graham is a deep person to analyze. He is very self serving, his positions are highly situational and inconsistent. He has dirty connections which lead him to support things like US created wars, amnesty bills, censorship bills, and so on. He is a miserable person. Anytime he takes a decent position, which is rare, he is… Read more »
Lindsey Graham has become a confused ‘bag of wind’. I am nearly 80 and he looks, sounds and acts like he is an old man, much older than I am. Is he beginning to lose it like Joe Biden in his mid ’70’s. I remember all the things he used to promise on the Sean Hannity show, but little came… Read more »
I think Graham has not been a reputable person for a long time, at least since 2006 when he enthusiastically sponsored and supported the amnesty bill, which failed, and he called us opponents bigots. Nothing ever came of any of his promises on the Hannity show. Hannity gave him free campaign air time weekly to lie to us.
Since you have been around a long time you remember Graham hamming it up on the Sunday new shows in the 70s. He did lots of talking about the “moral majority”, supporting it. He plays up to people. He was always a blowhard. Anything that gets him attention, campaign funds, establishment points, … is good to him.
He’s a republican Schumer.
There was a time when a person could count, somewhat, on SCOTUS to strike down such a law but past experience has proven whatever Congress so desires they will go along with, and at times exceed. I’ve said many times how the Constitution is preceded by the words, ‘We The People”, before any power is given Government. Therefore anything Congress… Read more »