Rep. Nunes Wins Major Victory In Defamation Case Against Ryan Lizza and Hearst – JONATHAN TURLEY

https://jonathanturley.org/2021/09/21/rep-nunes-wins-major-victory-in-defamation-case-against-ryan-lizza-and-hearst/

We have been following a slew of defamation lawsuits by political figures over the last few years. (See, e.g., here and here and hereand here and here and here and here and here). For torts scholars, it has been a bonanza of interesting issues touching on every element of defamation law. There is now an important ruling out of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit that could have enormous implications not just for the media but anyone who retweets stories or claims. The appellate panel ruled unanimously for Rep. Devin Nunes against journalist Ryan Lizza who now writes for Politico. Nunes will be allowed to litigate his claim that Lizza defamed him by claiming that he secretly moved his farm from California to Iowa and linked the move to the alleged use of undocumented labor. Not only does Nunes have no reported stake or operational involvement with the farm, there is no evidence of his effort to hide the move or conceal any use of undocumented laborers. However, the interesting aspect of the ruling is how a retweet by Lizza resuscitated the case for Nunes.

In 2019, Nunes sued Lizza and Hearst Magazines after Lizza wrote a feature article entitled “Devin Nunes’s Family Farm Is Hiding a Politically Explosive Secret,” in Esquire. Lizza asked in the article “Why would the Nuneses, Steve King, and an obscure dairy publication all conspire to hide the fact that the congressman’s family sold its farm and moved to Iowa?” The “explosive secret” appeared to be his moving the family dairy farm to Iowa from his district and the suggestion that the farm was using undocumented labor.

The claims, if false, could be the basis for defamation and a separate lawsuit against Lizza and Hearst by the family farm, NuStar, was previously found valid for the purposes of a trial. The issue was the separate Nunes complaint and federal judge C.J. Williams rejected his claims because “[m]oving or concealing a move is not a crime. Because the object of the ‘conspiracy’ is harmless, no reasonable reader could interpret the term ‘conspiracy’ to imply criminal conduct in this context.”

The appellate panel agreed that there was no express defamatory statement in the article. However, it found that a reasonable jury could find it defamatory by implication. As such, the statements do no need to be individually defamatory by creates defamatory meaning in the juxtaposing of fact or omitting facts. The court ruled that “[b]ased on the article’s presentation of facts, we think the complaint plausibly alleges that a reasonable reader could draw the implication that Representative Nunes conspired to hide the farm’s use of undocumented labor.”

The problem for Nunes is that he is a public official. The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision decades ago in New York Times v. Sullivan. This is precisely the environment in which the opinion was written. The Supreme Court ruled that tort law could not be used to overcome First Amendment protections for free speech or the free press. The Court sought to create “breathing space” for the media by articulating that standard that now applies to both public officials and public figures. As such, public officials and public figures must show either actual knowledge of its falsity or a reckless disregard of the truth.

Notably, Nunes sought to challenge New York Times v. Sullivan, which a lower court could not set aside. Presumably, he will seek an eventual Supreme Court review to achieve that purpose. However, the appellate court is bound to follow the precedent and held “[u]nder that demanding standard, we agree with the district court that the complaint is insufficient to state a claim of actual malice as to the original publication.”

That is when the case took a very interesting turn. The Court found that Lizza later retweeting and linking to his story created a viable basis for defamation. Under the “single publication” rule any one edition of a book or newspaper, even if distributed to in thousands of copies, constitutes one publication that may support only one cause of action. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 577A(3) (Am. L. Inst. 1977). However, there can be liability for a “republication.”

That is what the court found Lizza did when he later retweeted the publication. On November 20, 2019, Lizza tweeted: “I noticed that Devin Nunes is in the news. If you’re interested in a strange tale about Nunes, small-town Iowa, the complexities of immigration policy, a few car chases, and lots of cows, I’ve got a story for you.” That, according to the panel, tripped the wire by showing actual malice since he was now aware of the denials of involvement in the farm:

“The complaint here adequately alleges that Lizza intended to reach and actually reached a new audience by publishing a tweet about Nunes and a link to the article. In November 2019, Lizza was on notice of the article’s alleged defamatory implication by virtue of this lawsuit. The complaint alleges that he then consciously presented the material to a new audience by encouraging readers to peruse his “strange tale” about “immigration policy,” and promoting that “I’ve got a story for you.” Under those circumstances, the complaint sufficiently alleges that Lizza republished the article after he knew that the Congressman denied knowledge of undocumented labor on the farm or participation in any conspiracy to hide it.”

It is important to keep in mind that the “actual malice” standard can be shown by either making knowingly false statements or showing a reckless disregard for the truth. The irresistible impulse to strike out at Nunes may prove extremely costly for Lizza.

The panel held:

“Lizza tweeted the article in November 2019 after Nunes filed this lawsuit and denied the article’s implication. The pleaded facts are suggestive enough to render it plausible that Lizza, at that point, engaged in “the purposeful avoidance of the truth.” Harte-Hanks, 491 U.S. at 692.”

This could present a major new precedent if it is appealed to the Supreme Court. First, it could allow the Court to review New York Times v. Sullivangiven the questions raised by some justices recently about the case. Second, even if Sullivan is safe, it could expand possible liability by treating social media links and retweets as republications.

We have been discussing the rise of advocacy journalismand the rejection of objectivity in journalism schools. This ruling could present a serious push back on advocacy journalism where the line between fact and opinion is becoming increasingly blurry.

Here is the decision: Nunes opinion

Anatomy of a Smear: Corporate Press Deliberately Misquotes Nigel Farage | Political Arena

https://politicalarena.org/2021/08/06/anatomy-of-a-smear-corporate-press-deliberately-misquotes-nigel-farage/

When telling “the whole truth” complete quotes and the context it is said in is everything.

For example two quotes from the Bible are “and he hanged himself” and “go and do likewise.” Taken by themselves someone could build a false narrative around this and make the Bible seem horrible. In fact that is the very tactic that anti-Christian zealots use as a matter of routine.

The FBI could ask you what the color of a perp’s car was and you say read and later the FBI comes back at you and says “No it was magenta” and charges you with the “crime” of lying to the FBI. What the FBI does in real life is not far from this example. The Russia hoax investigation is full of such sophistry.

Redefining terms, playing games with the language and out and out falsehoods are an accepted tactic of the far left. Fully endorsed by leftist luminaries such as Antonio Gramsci, Walter Lippmann Lenin, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Cloward & Piven, Saul Alinsky as well as most any critical theorist.

Objective truth is simply not a value of the left. To them the “truth” is anything that advances “progress” towards socialism/communism.

British politician and civil rights leader Nigel Farage is a strong supporter of Israel. His speeches and actions over the years show this countless times. Farage has met with and supported strong Israeli leaders. Yet examine these headlines LINK LINK:

Shockingly, CDC Now Lists Vaccinated Deaths as Unvaccinated | Aletho News

https://alethonews.com/2021/09/15/shockingly-cdc-now-lists-vaccinated-deaths-as-unvaccinated/

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | September 15, 2021

While public health officials and mainstream media claim the COVID-19 pandemic is now “a pandemic of the unvaccinated,”1 we now know this claim is based on highly misleading statistics.

In a July 16, 2021, White House press briefing,2 U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Dr. Rochelle Walensky claimed that “over 97% of people who are entering the hospital right now are unvaccinated.” A few weeks later, in an August 5, 2021, statement, she inadvertently revealed how that statistic actually came about.3

As it turns out, the CDC was looking at hospitalization and mortality data from January through June 2021 — a timeframe during which the vast majority of the U.S. population were still unvaccinated.4

But that’s not the case at all now. The CDC is also playing with statistics in other ways to create the false and inaccurate impression that unvaccinated people make up the bulk of infections, hospitalizations and deaths. For example, we now find out the agency is counting anyone who died within the first 14 days post-injection as unvaccinated.

Not only does this inaccurately inflate the unvaccinated death toll, but it also hides the real dangers of the COVID shots, as the vast majority of deaths from these shots occur within the first two weeks.5 Now their deaths are counted as unvaccinated deaths rather than being counted as deaths due to vaccine injury or COVID-19 breakthrough infections!

How CDC Counts Breakthrough Cases

According to the CDC,6 you’re not counted as fully vaccinated until a full 14 days have passed since your second injection in the case of Pfizer or Moderna, or 14 days after your first dose of Janssen. This is how the CDC defines a vaccine breakthrough case:

“… a vaccine breakthrough infection is defined as the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen in a respiratory specimen collected from a person ≥14 days after they have completed all recommended doses of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorized COVID-19 vaccine.”

In other words, if you’ve received one dose of Pfizer or Moderna and develop symptomatic COVID-19, get admitted to the hospital and/or die from COVID, you’re counted as an unvaccinated case. If you’ve received two doses and get ill within 14 days, you’re still counted as an unvaccinated case.

The problem with this is that over 80% of hospitalizations and deaths appear to be occurring among those who have received the jabs, but this reality is hidden by the way cases are defined and counted. A really clever and common strategy of the CDC during the pandemic has been to change the definitions and goalposts so it supports their nefarious narrative.

For example, the CDC has quietly changed the definition of “vaccine,” apparently in an attempt to validate calling the COVID mRNA gene therapies vaccines. In an August 26, 2021, archived version7 of vaccine, the CDC defines it as a “product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”

But a few days later, a new definition appeared on the CDC’s website,8 which now says a vaccine is a “preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.” The differences in the definitions are subtle but distinct: The first one defined a vaccine as something that will “produce immunity.”

But, since the COVID-19 vaccines are not designed to stop infection but, rather, to only lessen the degree of infection, it becomes obvious that the new definition was created to cover the COVID vaccines.

Different Testing Guidelines for Vaxxed and Unvaxxed

It’s not just the CDC’s definition of a breakthrough case that skews the data. Even more egregious and illogical is the fact that the CDC even has two different sets of testing guidelines — one for vaccinated patients and another for the unvaccinated.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, the CDC has recommended a PCR test cycle threshold (CT) of 40.9 This flies in the face of scientific consensus, which has long been that a CT over 35 will produce 97% false positives,10 essentially rendering the test useless.11,12,13

In mid-May 2021, the CDC finally lowered its recommended CT count, but only for patients who have received one or more COVID shots.14 So, if you have received a COVID injection, the CDC’s guidelines call for your PCR test to be run at a CT of 28 or less. If you are unvaccinated, your PCR test is to be run at a CT of 40, which grossly overestimates the true prevalence of infection.

The end result is that unvaccinated individuals who get tested are FAR more prone to get false positives, while those who have received the jab are more likely to get an accurate diagnosis of infection.

Only Hospitalization and Death Count if You’re COVID Jabbed

Even that’s not all. The CDC also hides vaccine failures and props up the “pandemic of the unvaccinated” narrative by only counting breakthrough cases that result in hospitalization or death.

In other words, if you got your second COVID shot more than 14 days ago and you develop symptoms, you do not count as a breakthrough case unless you’re admitted to the hospital and/or die from COVID-19 in the hospital, even if you test positive. So, to summarize, COVID breakthrough cases count only if all of the following apply:

  • The patient received the second dose of the Pfizer or Moderna shot at least 14 days ago (or one dose in case of Johnson & Johnson’s single-dose injection)
  • The patient tests positive for SARS-CoV-2 using a CT of 28 or less, which avoids false positives
  • The patient is admitted to the hospital for COVID-19 and/or dies in the hospital

Vaccinated Probably Make Up Bulk of Hospitalizations

If vaccinated and unvaccinated were not treated with such varying standards, we’d probably find that the vaccinated now make up the bulk of hospitalizations, making the COVID pandemic one of the vaccinated. An August 30, 2021, exposé by The Epoch Times reveals what’s really happening on the front lines:15

“After a battery of testing, my friend was diagnosed with pancreatitis. But it was easier for the hospital bureaucracy to register the admission as a COVID case … The mainstream media is reporting that severe COVID cases are mainly among unvaccinated people … Is that what’s really going on?

It’s certainly not the case in Israel, the first country to fully vaccinate a majority of its citizens against the virus. Now it has one of the highest daily infection rates and the majority of people catching the virus (77 percent to 83 percent, depending on age) are already vaccinated, according to data collected by the Israeli government …

After admission, I spoke to the nurse on the COVID ward … The nurse told me that she had gotten both vaccines but she was feeling worried: ‘Two thirds of my patients are fully vaccinated,’ she said. How can there be such a disconnect between what the COVID ward nurse told me and the mainstream media reports?”

The heart of the problem is that the U.S. is not even trying to achieve an accurate count. As noted by The Epoch Times, “the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have publicly acknowledged that they do not have accurate data.”

So, when you hear that cases are rising, and that most of them are unvaccinated, you need to ask: “Are these people who have had one vaccine and gotten sick, two vaccines and gotten sick, or no vaccines at all? Without more details, it is impossible to know what is really going on,” The Epoch Times says.16

All we do know, according to one doctor who spoke with The Epoch Times, is “the vaccines are not as effective as public health officials told us they would be. ‘This is a product that’s not doing what it’s supposed to do. It’s supposed to stop transmission of this virus and it’s not doing that.’”

Counting Non-COVID Illness as COVID Cases

On top of all of that, hospitals are still also reporting non-COVID related illnesses as COVID. As reported by The Epoch Times :17

“Health authorities around the world have been doing this since the beginning of the COVID crisis. For example, a young man in Orange County, Florida who died in a motorcycle crash last summer was originally considered a COVID death by state health officials …

And a middle-aged construction worker fell off a ladder in Croatia and was also counted as a death from COVID … To muddy the waters further, even people who test negative for COVID are sometimes counted as COVID deaths.

Consider the case of 26-year-old Matthew Irvin, a father of three from Yamhill County, Oregon. As reported by KGW8 News, Irvin went to the ER with stomach pain, nausea, and diarrhea on July 5, 2020. But instead of admitting him to the hospital, the doctors sent him home.

Five days later, on July 10, 2020, Irvin died. Though his COVID test came back negative two days after his death and his family told reporters and public health officials that no one Irvin had been around had any COVID symptoms, the medical examiner allegedly told the family that an autopsy was not necessary, listing his death as a coronavirus case. It took the Oregon Health Authority two and a half months to correct the mistake.

In an even more striking example of overcounting COVID deaths, a nursing home in New Jersey that only has 90 beds was wrongly reported as having 753 deaths from COVID. According to a spokesman, they had fewer than twenty deaths. In other words, the number of deaths was over-reported by 3,700 percent.”

No Need to Fear the Delta Variant if You’re Unvaccinated

In a June 29, 2021, interview,18 Fauci called the Delta variant “a game-changer” for unvaccinated people, warning it will devastate the unvaccinated population while vaccinated individuals are protected against it. Alas, in the real world, the converse is turning out to be true, as the Delta variant is running wild primarily among those who got the COVID jab.

In a June 30, 2021, appearance on Fox News, epidemiologist and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough pointed out that “It is very clear from the U.K. Technical Briefing19 that was published June 18 that the vaccine provides no protection against the Delta variant.”20

The reason for this is because the Delta variant contains three different mutations, all in the spike protein. This allows this variant to evade the immune responses in those who have received the COVID jabs, but not those who have natural immunity, which is much broader.

Even so, the Delta variant is far milder than previous variants, according to the U.K.’s June 18, 2021, Technical Briefing.21 In it, they present data showing the Delta variant is more contagious but far less deadly and easier to treat. As McCullough told Fox News:

“Whether you get the vaccine or not, patients will get some very mild symptoms like a cold and they can be easily managed … Patients who have severe symptoms or at high risk, we can use simple drug combinations at home and get them through the illness. So, there’s no reason now to push vaccinations.”

Contrast that with the following statement made by President Biden during a CNN town hall meeting in Cincinnati, Ohio, in late July 2021:22

“We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple. If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, not going to the ICU unit, and not going to die. You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”

However, Dr. Leana Wen, an emergency doctor and visiting professor of health policy and management at George Washington University’s Milken School of Public Health in Washington, D.C., contradicted the president, saying he had led the American astray by telling them you don’t need a mask if you’re vaccinated, or that you can’t get it or transmit it. As reported by CNN Health:23

“In particular, Wen took issue with Biden’s incorrect claims that you cannot contract Covid-19 or the Delta variant if you are vaccinated. ‘I was actually disappointed,’ Wen said. ‘I actually thought he was answering questions as if it were a month ago. He’s not really meeting the realities of what’s happening on the ground. I think he may have led people astray.’”

CNN added that Wen had told their political commentator Anderson Cooper that “many unknown answers remain related to Covid-19, and that it is still not known how well protected vaccinated individuals are from mild illness … [or] if you’re vaccinated, could you still be contagious to other people.”

Vaccinated Patients Flood Hospitals Around the World

The U.K. data showing the Delta variant is far milder than previous SARS-CoV-2 viruses deflates the claim that avoiding severe illness is a sign that the shots are working. Since the Delta variant typically doesn’t cause severe illness in the first place, it doesn’t make sense to attribute milder illness to the shot.

But if Delta is the mildest coronavirus variant yet, why are so many “vaccinated” people ending up in the hospital? While we still do not have clear confirmation, this could be a sign that antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) is at work. Alternatively, it could be that vaccine injuries are being misreported as breakthrough cases.

Whatever the case may be, real-world data from areas with high COVID jab rates show a disturbing trend. For example, August 1, 2021, the director of Israel’s Public Health Services, Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis, announced half of all COVID-19 infections were among the fully vaccinated.24 Signs of more serious disease among fully vaccinated are also emerging, she said, particularly in those over the age of 60.

A few days later, August 5, 2021, Dr. Kobi Haviv, director of the Herzog Hospital in Jerusalem, appeared on Channel 13 News, reporting that 95% of severely ill COVID-19 patients are fully vaccinated, and that they make up 85% to 90% of COVID-related hospitalizations overall.25

In Scotland, official data on hospitalizations and deaths show 87% of those who have died from COVID-19 in the third wave that began in early July were vaccinated.26

In Gibraltar, which has a 99% COVID jab compliance rate, COVID cases have risen by 2,500% since June 1, 2021,27 and in Iceland, where over 82% have received the shots, 77% of new COVID cases are among the fully vaccinated.28

Data from the U.K. show a similar trend among those over the age of 50. In this age group, partially and fully “vaccinated” people account for 68% of hospitalizations and 70% of COVID deaths.29

A CDC investigation of an outbreak in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, between July 6, 2021, through July 25, 2021, found 74% of those who received a diagnosis of COVID19, and 80% of hospitalizations, were among the fully vaccinated.30,31 Most, but not all, had the Delta variant.

The CDC also found that fully vaccinated individuals who contract the infection have as high a viral load in their nasal passages as unvaccinated individuals who get infected.32 The same was found in a British study, a preprint of which was posted mid-August 2021.33,34 This means the vaccinated are just as infectious as the unvaccinated.

Interestingly, a Lancet preprint study35 that examined breakthrough infections in health care workers in Vietnam who received the AstraZeneca COVID shot found the “viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020.”

What’s more, they found no correlation between vaccine-induced neutralizing antibody levels and viral loads or the development of symptoms. According to the authors:

“Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, explaining the transmission between the vaccinated people.”

Not All Vaccinated Are Confirmed Vaccinated

As if all of that weren’t enough, there’s yet one more confounder. Just because you got the COVID shot does not mean you’ve been confirmed as having gotten the shot. You’re only confirmed “vaccinated” if your COVID injection is added to your medical record, and this sometimes doesn’t happen if you’re going to a temporary vaccination clinic, a drive-through or pharmacy, for example. As reported by CNN:36

“If you are among the countless people who didn’t get the doses at a primary care doctor’s office, there may not be any record of the vaccination on file with your doctor.”

To actually count as a “confirmed vaccinated” individual, you must send your vaccination card to your primary care physician’s office and have them add it to your electronic medical record. If you got the shot at a pharmacy, you’ll need to verify that they forwarded your proof of vaccination to your doctor. Primary care offices are then responsible for sharing their patients’ immunization data with the state’s immunization information system.

Patient-recorded proof of vaccination is only accepted for influenza and pneumococcal vaccines, not COVID-19 injections.37 What this all means is that, say you got the shot several weeks ago at a drive-through vaccination clinic and get admitted to the hospital with COVID symptoms. Unless your COVID shot status has actually been added into the medical system, you will not count as “vaccinated.”

This too can skew the statistics, because we know the CDC ascertains vaccination status by matching SARS-CoV-2 case surveillance and CAIR2 data using person-level identifiers and algorithms.38

As noted by John Zurlo, division director of infectious disease at Thomas Jefferson University, “the lack of reliable vaccine records complicates efforts to precisely understand vaccine effectiveness and determine how many local hospitalizations and deaths are resulting from COVID-19 breakthrough infections.”39

We’re in the Largest Clinical Trial in Medical History

In closing, it’s worth remembering that the COVID injection campaign is part and parcel of a clinical trial. As noted Dr. Lidiya Angelova in a recent Genuine Prospect article:40

“Many people are unaware that they are participating in the largest clinical trial test of our times. It is because World Health Organization, healthcare authorities, politicians, celebrities, and journalists promote the experimental medical treatments (wrongly called COVID-19 vaccines) as safe and efficient while in fact these treatments are in early clinical research stage.

It means that there is not enough data for such claims and that the people who participate are test subject.”

As shown in a graph on Genuine Prospect, under normal circumstances, clinical research follows a strict protocol that begins with tests on cell cultures. After that comes tests on animals, then limited human testing in four phases. In Phase 1 of human testing, up to 100 people are included and followed anywhere from one week to several months.

Phase 2 typically includes several hundred participants and lasts up to two years. In Phase 3, several hundred to 3,000 participants are tested upon for one to four years. Phase 4 typically includes several thousand individuals who are followed for at least one year or longer. After each phase, the data is examined to assess effectiveness and adverse reactions.

The timelines for these stages and phases were not followed for the COVID “vaccines.” Most Phase 3 trials concluded by the end of 2020, and everyone who got the shots since their rollout under emergency use authorization is part of a Phase 4 clinical trial, whether they realize it or not.41 And since the trials are not completed, you simply cannot make definitive claims about safety, especially long-term safety. As noted by Angelova:42

“When I worked at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) … I went to the course Ethical and Regulatory Aspects of Clinical Research … The first rule we learnt was ‘Clinical research must be ethical’ … All ethical aspects of clinical research are dismissed with the COVID-19 vaccines.

People should know that nobody can require such to participate in everyday activities like using public transportation, shopping, going to school and even hospital. People should know that they should not be punished for refusing to take the experimental medical treatments.

COVID-19 vaccines mass use and COVID-19 measures are an infringe[ment] of the Articles 2, 3, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 18, 20, 25, 27, 28 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).”

Sources and References

Science Denied: The Biden Vaccine Mandate | ZeroHedge | Truth2Freedom’s Blog

https://truth4freedom.wordpress.com/2021/09/15/science-denied-the-biden-vaccine-mandate-zerohedge/

In a maniacal move of wild desperation – or as an excuse to try out the most extreme powers of his office – he is using every weapon that he believes he has to assure compliance with his dream of injecting as many arms as possible. Only then will we crush the virus, all thanks to his leadership, all the complaints about “freedom” be damned – and never mind that the realization of his dream did not work in Israel or the UK.

What are the immediate problems here? At least five:

1. The Biden mandate pretends that the only immunity is injected, not natural. And so it has been from the beginning of this pandemic, even though all science for at least a year – actually you can say centuries – contradicts that. Indeed, we’ve known about natural immunity since 400 B.C when Thucydides first wrote of the great Athens plague that revealed that “they knew the course of the disease and were themselves free from apprehension.” Biden’s mandate could affect 80 million people but far more than that have likely been exposed and gained robust immunity regardless of vaccination status.

— Read on

Does Facebook Have Different Rules For VIPs? Report Of Leaked Documents Suggest It Does | PA Pundits – International

https://papundits.wordpress.com/2021/09/14/does-facebook-have-different-rules-for-vips-report-of-leaked-documents-suggest-it-does/
By Alexander Hall ~ Facebook reportedly has a specific set of elite users who don’t have to follow the same censorship rules applied to average users.


There’s a club of elites who don’t have to follow the same rules, and Facebook has reportedly hidden it until now. “A program known as XCheck has given millions of celebrities, politicians and other high-profile users special treatment, a privilege many abuse” reported The Wall Street Journal on Monday. The Journal suggested that XCheck “was initially intended as a quality-control measure for actions taken against high-profile accounts, including celebrities, politicians and journalists.” In practice, however, it reportedly “shields millions of VIP users from the company’s normal enforcement process.” The report described some users as being “whitelisted” or “rendered immune from enforcement actions—while others are allowed to post rule-violating material pending Facebook employee reviews that often never come.” The list does not appear to merely include politicians whose statements may be important for public knowledge. “In 2019, it allowed international soccer star Neymar to show nude photos of a woman, who had accused him of rape, to tens of millions of his fans before the content was removed by Facebook.” The Journal directly scorched Facebook as an institution: “In describing the system, Facebook has misled the public and its own Oversight Board, a body that Facebook created to ensure the accountability of the company’s enforcement systems.” XCheck “was designed for an important reason: to create an additional step so we can accurately enforce policies on content that could require more understanding,” Facebook’s Policy Communications Directoracebook spokesman Andy Stone reportedly explained to The Journal. “A lot of this internal material is outdated information stitched together to create a narrative that glosses over the most important point: Facebook itself identified the issues with cross check and has been working to address them.” After having reportedly reviewed “an extensive array of internal Facebook communications” from Facebook, The Journal made a grim assessment of how the company is run. “Facebook knows, in acute detail, that its platforms are riddled with flaws that cause harm, often in ways only the company fully understands,” reported The Journal. “Moreover, the documents show, Facebook often lacks the will or the ability to address them.” Big Tech censorship has disproportionately aided the left in recent years. A shocking revelation released by the New York Post on October 14, 2020, cited purported emails from then-Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s son Hunter. The news outlet reportedly exposed the alleged corrupt dealings of both father and son in Ukraine. Facebook and Twitter disabled links to the story in October, mere weeks before the election. The media blackout on the Hunter Biden scandal was a political game changer with dire electoral implications.

Conservatives are under attack! Contact Facebook headquarters at 1-650-308-7300 and demand that Big Tech mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Alexander Hall contributes posts at the NewsBusters site, and he is a staff writer for MRC TechWatch. Read more Great Articles at NewsBusters . http://newsbusters.org/

“Who Cuts Off – President’s Microphone?” – Senator Risch Grills Blinken During Senate Testimony – Blinken Lies and Says Americans Are Making This Up (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit | Truth2Freedom’s Blog

https://truth4freedom.wordpress.com/2021/09/14/who-cuts-off-presidents-microphone-senator-risch-grills-blinken-during-senate-testimony-blinken-lies-and-says-americans-are-making-this-up-vi/

Biden traveled to Boise, Idaho on Monday as part of his visit to the western part of the US.

Joe Biden went off-script at the end of the briefing so the White House cut the feed. This was just the latest time that the White House cut off Joe Biden to save him from himself.

On Tuesday Secretary of State Tony Blinken spoke before the US Senate following the disastrous Biden withdrawal from Afghanistan and the arming of the Taliban terrorists.

During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the disastrous U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, Ranking Republican Senator Jim Risch presses Secretary of State Antony Blinken on who at the White House cuts off the president’s microphone when they don’t want him to continue speaking.

Senator Jim Risch: Who in the White House has the authority to press the button and cut off the president’s speaking ability? Who is that person?

Tony Blinken: I think anyone who knows the president including members of this committee knows that he speaks very clearly and very deliberately for himself. No one else does.

Sen. Risch: Are you saying that there is no one in the White House who can cut him off because yesterday that happened and it happened a number of times before that. It’s been widely reported…

Blinken: There is no such person, again the president speaks for himself.

Sen. Risch: So are you unaware that this is actually happening?… So this didn’t happen yesterday or on other occasions when the media showed the American people that his sentence was cut off in midsentence?

Tony Blinken went on to say there is no such person. Then he denied that it has ever happened as the senator suggested. Tony Blinken is a liar – just like the rest of them.

Via CSPAN:

“Who Cuts Off – President’s Microphone?” – Senator Risch Grills Blinken During Senate Testimony – Blinken Lies and Says Americans Are Making This Up (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

Watchdog slams media over Fauci coverage as report appears to show NIH funded gain-of-function research | Truth2Freedom’s Blog

https://truth4freedom.wordpress.com/2021/09/13/watchdog-slams-media-over-fauci-coverage-as-report-appears-to-show-nih-funded-gain-of-function-research/

A conservative media watchdog has accused corporate media outlets of engaging in censorship by failing to cover the release of documents confirming that the U.S. government did fund gain-of-function research at a virology lab in China despite multiple assertions to the contrary.

Source: Watchdog slams media over Fauci coverage as report appears to show NIH funded gain-of-function research

“Extreme Cover-Up” – Scientists Who Penned Lancet Letter To Bat Down Lab Theory Have Links To China

https://www.nationandstate.com/2021/09/12/extreme-cover-up-scientists-who-penned-lancet-letter-to-bat-down-lab-theory-have-links-to-china/
“Extreme Cover-Up” – Scientists Who Penned Lancet Letter To Bat Down Lab Theory Have Links To China An investigation by The Daily Telegraph reveals that all but one scientist who wrote a letter in The Lancet medical journal dismissing even the slightest possibility COVID-19 originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, have ties to Chinese researchers. This…

Al Qaeda leader, believed dead, appears in video on 9/11 anniversary | Truth2Freedom’s Blog

https://truth4freedom.wordpress.com/2021/09/12/al-qaeda-leader-believed-dead-appears-in-video-on-9-11-anniversary/
Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri appeared in a video released Saturday — the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks raising questions over death.

Deadly bat caves & humanized mice tests: Released docs describe ‘HIGHEST RISK’ involved in US-funded coronavirus research in Wuhan — RT World News

https://www.rt.com/news/534175-wuhan-lab-coronavirus-research-risks/

Documents obtained by The Intercept reveal that the US
government funded studies into coronavirus in bats in Wuhan long before
the pandemic, with the proposal showing it was aware of the risk that
researchers would be infected.
More than 900 pages of material related to this research were published on
the non-profit media company’s website on Tuesday. The documents were
acquired as part of an ongoing Freedom of Information Act litigation by
The Intercept against the National Institutes of Health.

The
documents detail the work of EcoHealth Alliance, a US-based organization
specializing in protection against infectious diseases, and its work
with Chinese partners on coronaviruses, specifically those originating
in bats.



Also on rt.com
Deadlier than Covid-19, but less contagious: What we know about Nipah bat-borne virus threatening to become new scourge in India

The papers detail that EcoHealth Alliance was granted a total of
$3.1 million by the federal government, with $599,000 of that going to
the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The funding received in Wuhan was used
in part to identify and genetically alter bat coronaviruses that might
infect humans.

EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak led one
of the studies, titled ‘Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus
Emergence’, which screened thousands of bats for novel coronaviruses.
The research also involved the screening of people who work with live
animals.

However, the released documents include a recognition of the potential risks posed by the project. “Fieldwork
involves the highest risk of exposure to SARS or other CoVs while
working in caves with high bat density overhead and the potential for
fecal dust to be inhaled,” the grant application reads.



Also on rt.com
Biden’s latest ‘lab leak’ report tells us nothing… but it won’t stop the US blaming China for Covid

“In this proposal, they actually point out that they
know how risky this work is. They keep talking about people potentially
getting bitten – and they kept records of everyone who got bitten,” Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute, in the US, told The Intercept in response to the release.

Another
revelation was that experimental work with humanized mice (that is,
with functioning human genes, cells, tissues, and/or organs) was
conducted at the Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment, a
biosafety level-three lab, and not at the Wuhan Institute of Virology,
mainland China’s first biosafety level-four lab, as originally thought.

The
program ran from 2014 to 2019, and was renewed in 2019, only for former
US president Donald Trump to cancel it. Robert Kessler, communications
manager at EcoHealth Alliance, maintained there wasn’t a lot to say on
the matter. “We applied for grants to conduct research. The relevant agencies deemed that to be important research, and thus funded it,” he noted.



Also on rt.com
Russia building ‘sanitary
shield’ network of labs working with dangerous viruses, to understand
pathogens & develop new vaccines

While the US has blasted China for not releasing all the relevant
information on Covid-19, The Intercept said it had requested the
recently released documents back in September 2020.

Although they
don’t provide conclusive evidence to support the theory that Covid-19
was leaked from a Chinese lab, it does highlight the fact that risky
research into bat coronaviruses was being undertaken in the years
leading up the pandemic, and the US was not only well aware of that, but
also funded it. Bats have been identified as a possible zoonotic source
for the virus.

World Health Organization experts spent around a
month in China from January this year. Their report suggested that cases
identified in Wuhan in 2019 were believed to have been acquired from “a zoonotic source, as many [of those initially infected] reported visiting or working in the Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market.”



Also on rt.com
‘Scapegoating China cannot whitewash the US’: Beijing blasts Washington ahead of American report into Covid-19 origins

Beijing has refused to take part in a second probe, rejecting the
lab leak theory while, in turn, calling for an investigation into
US-based laboratories.