After court filings showed the Biden administration personally pushed Facebook to block his program, Tucker Carlson criticized it on his show the next day.
The White House’s director of digital strategy emailed Facebook monitors about a video in which Carlson questioned the effectiveness of the COVID vaccines, according to court documents released as part of a lawsuit against the Biden administration for allegedly conspiring with social media executives to suppress stories.
According to Carlson on his program Monday night, the director, Rob Flaherty, then persuaded Facebook to “limit” the story’s availability.
Jeff Landry, the attorney general of Louisiana, and Carlson claim that the action blatantly violated their First Amendment rights.
This revelation comes shortly after it was reported that Twitter executives were under government pressure to delete any COVID material that was “true but uncomfortable.”
The #1 post on Facebook on vaccines right now is Tucker Carlson stating they don’t work,’ Flaherty said in an email to Facebook officials in April 2021, according to extracts from legal filings Carlson posted on his program on Monday.
He reportedly continued by pressuring the social media juggernaut to implement its “reduction” approach.
I’m not sure that counts as decrease if “reduction” means “pushing our most vaccine-averse audience with Tucker Carlson stating it doesn’t work”! Flaherty penned an email.
Later, a Facebook staffer said he agreed and was “running this down immediately.”
The Biden administration’s own VERS database, which showed a significant number of dangers linked with the injection, was cited by Carlson as evidence that “it was never really a secret that there were major difficulties with the COVID shots” from the start of his program.
We made an effort to draw attention to it more than a year ago, not because we disagree with the vaccination or are antivaxxers, but rather because if you’re going to make someone take anything, you should probably know what it is and any potential side effects.
However, he said, “In attempting to argue that we were censored, and now we know we were directly censored by the White House.”
Jeff Landry, who launched the lawsuit against the Biden administration together with Missouri attorney general Eric Schmitt, was Carlson’s next interviewee.
Landry said that after reviewing the court records, he had the impression that the White House had sought the removal of Carlson’s film.
“It’s definitely a violation of your First Amendment right, Tucker,” he informed Carlson.
The lawsuit Landry and Schmitt filed in October, which “is about whether or whether the government fundamentally restricted Americans’ expression,” was brought up further by Landry.
He said that Schmitt and he believed that the Biden administration was stifling opinions that they disagreed with.
He said, ‘And the evidence in this case right now is telling us that’s precisely what occurred. It’s definitely a violation of the First Amendment.’
The lawsuit alleged that the Biden administration colluded with social media juggernauts to ‘suppress’ news reports that were critical of the White House.
When the lawsuit was initially brought in October, Landry stated in a statement, “We have revealed a worrying degree of collaboration between Big Tech and Big Government.”
The rights of the American people will be vigorously defended in response to this outrageous assault on our First Amendment.
Stories regarding COVID-19 and, more recently, White House officials’ assurance that the US economy is not headed for a slump were among the subjects they charged the White House with suppressing.
In light of recent news that the U.S. economy has experienced two consecutive quarters of GDP contraction, the lawsuit argues that social media platforms are starting to restrict objections of the Biden Administration’s effort to redefine the term “recession.”
It links to a Fox News piece on how Facebook debunked an economist’s assertion that the US was in a recession.
Therefore, the conduct of the defendants alleged herein “has created, with extraordinary efficacy, a situation where Americans seeking to exercise their fundamental free-speech right to criticize the President of the United States are subject to aggressive prior restraint by private companies acting at the bidding of government officials.”
According to the attorneys general, this kind of coverage “is untenable” under First Amendment guidelines.
Additionally, they charge the White House and associated organizations of operating “open and explicit suppression campaigns.”
Senior government officials in the Executive Branch have entered a phase of open collusion with social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social media platforms under the Orwellian guise of halting so-called “disinformation,” “misinformation,” and “malinformation,” the court filing states. “Having threatened and cajoled social media platforms for years to censor viewpoints and speakers disfavored by the Left,” the filing reads.
The case is now in the discovery phase, during which attorneys for both parties may subpoena witnesses.
The Trump and Biden administrations meanwhile exerted pressure on Twitter executives to remove material that was “accurate but uncomfortable,” according to newly made public documents.
Journalist David Zweig exposed how the government might block regular people’ freedom of expression on Twitter last month in a series of tweets, even while they were using the Centers for Disease Control’s own statistics.
Aside from that, the Biden administration increased pressure on Twitter to oust former New York Times writer Alex Berenson for his comments against Covid vaccines.
The president declared social media corporations were “killing individuals” for permitting vaccine falsehoods in the summer of 2021, and only a few hours after, Berenson’s account was terminated, he said, adding that the campaign intensified when Biden became office.
The next month, he was removed from the website. He later sued Twitter and reached a settlement.
Twitter was required to divulge internal messages as part of the litigation process, which revealed how the White House exerted pressure on the business to take action against Berenson.
However, the Biden administration reportedly felt “extremely furious” about Twitter’s lack of action in deplatforming other accounts and put pressure on executives to take more action.
Zweig tweeted that “Twitter officials did not totally bow to the Biden team’s desires.”
‘A thorough examination of the company’s internal emails indicated that workers often discussed moderation cases in-depth and with more care than the government did with regard to free expression.
Twitter did, however, censor opinions that disagreed with the official stances of the White House, including those from physicians and scientific professionals.
As a consequence, Zweig argued, “valid conclusions and inquiries that would have widened the public discourse were missed.”
»Tucker Carlson attacks Biden for banning his show«