American and British liberals are absolute authoritarians, which is why few things anger and concern them more than technologies that empower uncredentialed serfs to communicate ideas to one another without the control of superior benevolent corporate & state authorities.
The NYT provided the perfect encapsulation of this authoritarian mindset when it warned: "Unfettered conversations are taking place on Clubhouse!"

Fourteen state Attorneys General -- all Democrats -- just sent a letter to Mark Zuckerberg demanding to know, based on "whistleblower" Frances Haugen's documents, why FB hasn't been censoring more content more aggressively.

oag.ca.gov/system/files/a…
If you're comfortable with having the Party that controls both houses of Congress & the WH (and thus the entire executive branch) dictating to tech companies who can and can't be heard on the internet, and what views should or shouldn't be permitted, then you are an authoritarian
As the Supreme Court has held, if government officials apply pressure and coercion to private companies to censor for them -- by threatening them with punishment if they fail to comply -- it is treated as state censorship and violates the First Amendment:

greenwald.substack.com/p/congress-esc…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Glenn Greenwald

Glenn Greenwald Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ggreenwald

17 Oct
I read this ACLU brief. This is the first time, at least to my knowledge, that ACLU is explicitly arguing in court that the First Amendment's free speech clause has been interpreted *too broadly* by courts, and are advocating *a more restrictive view* of what free speech means.
The ACLU was a crucial influence on my political and legal outlook in childhood and early adulthood. There have been many valid criticisms of them as they changed -- including from its former leaders -- but to see them explicitly urging more free speech restrictions is shocking.
I really believe that within 18-24 months, ACLU - either a state affiliate or the national group - will argue in court that hate speech is outside 1st Amendment protections because it infringes the rights of marginalized groups. This brief is a big step.

theintercept.com/2020/10/20/is-…
Read 4 tweets
16 Oct
The actions of the 1/6 Committee with Adam Schiff, Liz Cheney and the worst people in Congress have become so abusive that even left-liberal groups and scholars (not @ACLU) are now raising concerns. Yet just like 9/11, Dems see 1/6 as so traumatizing, no questions are allowed.
There is a body of 200 years of Supreme Court jurisprudence placing serious limits on the Congressional investigative power. Some came from the McCarthy probes. A CRS report *this year* highlighted those. People who never heard of any of this insist objections are laughable.
If people really believe 1/6 was an Insurrection and an act of sedition -- the greatest attack on US democracy since the Civil War, as Biden's speechwriters put it -- how are they not indignant to the point of protests that the Biden DOJ has charged *nobody* with those crimes???
Read 5 tweets
15 Oct
The Young Turks published a ten-minute YouTube video last night purporting to refute my critiques of CIA, insisting CIA is a law-abiding organization subject to the control of the President and the laws of Congress.

The funniest part is their channel is called RebelHQ.
That's what American liberalism and large swaths of the online soft-left have become:

"Watch my video debunking the terrible slander against the CIA, a fine and patriotic organization, tonight on . . . RebelHQ." 🌹
This newest Gallup polling data from last month is extraordinary.

Democrats continue to hold the CIA & FBI in extremely high regard, while GOP faith in those two security state agencies continues to rapidly collapse.

news.gallup.com/poll/355130/jo…
Read 4 tweets
15 Oct
The Chair of House 1/6 Investigative Committee, @BennieGThompson (D-MS), demanded *on 1/7* that FBI put anyone at the Capitol **on the no-fly list**, one of the worst abuses of the first War on Terror. This Committee is a civil liberties menace.

homeland.house.gov/news/press-rel…
I've been working for weeks on this article outlining the violations of the Constitution and other legal protections by this Committee -- not just in its behavior but its very existence.

Civil liberties have been trampled in the name of 1/6. This Committee is the worst of all.
One might think @ACLU would have something to say about Congress hauling private citizens before them to be interrogated about their application for a protest permit, and subpoenas to telecoms to get communications records of protesters. But they will not alienate liberal donors.
Read 4 tweets
14 Oct
I really wish people would read the Supreme Court's McCarthy era cases. The Court demanded answers from Congress on why they had the right to investigate private citizens' Communist associations & plots given *only* DOJ has the power to investigate crimes. Congress' reply, 1957:
The Court -- both during Congress' McCarthy probes and before -- stressed that while Congress can issue subpoenas to help write new laws or exert oversight over the Executive, compelling private citizens to answer about their political acts is particularly dangerous and dubious.
The most recent Congressional Research Service report on the limits of Congress' power to investigate -- and there are real limits! -- made clear that the exact excuse given by the 1/6 Committee (we need to know!) is exactly what is an invalid ground for investigating Americans.
Read 8 tweets
14 Oct
This is the most repellent part of this CNN debacle with Rogan. I understand that young journalists refrain from saying what they think out of fear: that's the climate of the industry.

But Gupta has total career security: why would he so publicly relinquish his dignity this way?
One of CNN's longest and most prominent commentators, Sanjay Gupta, *admitted* CNN lied about Joe Rogan.

But *not one* CNN host admitted this let alone apologized for it. Instead, they forced Gupta to go on air and backtrack.

CNN's model is to lie. How much clearer can it be?
This is the 2nd example just this month showing conclusively that these media corporations *purposely* spread disinformation.

They spent weeks lying to Americans that the Biden emails were "Russian disinformation," then *ignored* the new proof from @SchreckReports that they lied
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(