The Biden industrial censorship complex had a major victory this week handed to them by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee who has betrayed both the First Amendment and the supporters of the President who nominated her in upholding the Biden administration’s ongoing suppression of free speech. Justice Barrett wrote the Murthy v. Missouri decision, which allowed the Biden Administration to continue censoring conservative publications online through coercive demands to social media companies.
The vast system used by the federal government to coerce social media companies to comply is without precedent in history. Justice Alito, in dissent, called Murthy one of “the most important free speech cases to reach this Court in years.”
The Murthy decision, authored by Justice Barrett, was influenced behind the scenes by a law clerk whose wife is connected to the Biden industrial censorship complex.
The petty topics that became unspeakable because of White House officials demanding takedowns include: Hunter Biden’s crime laptop, COVID lockdowns, the effectiveness of masks, the effectiveness of viruses, voter fraud and election integrity, among other topics.
The White House and Supreme Court majority agree: you are not allowed to criticize the obviously fraudulent 2020 election and express that opinion online. The government cannot be stopped from demanding the deletion of your political opinions online while the Missouri v. Biden case progresses.
That censorship system is vast and complex. “Fact-checking” organizations “rate” news stories for accuracy, always deeming conservative news and views as fake and illegitimate and always rating left-wing lies as completely accurate and true. Then those ratings are aggregated, and then combined with other slipshod and dishonest “analysis” by NewsGuard for an overall outlet “rating.” That overall rating is then used by far-left pressure groups and governments to officially suppress and demonetize and otherwise make economic war against conservative media outlets, to ensure they go bankrupt or become unprofitable.
A key link in that chain of entities is NewsGuard, cofounded in 2018 by Gordon Crovitz and Steven Brill. NewsGuard has been hostile to the Gateway Pundit, and to conservative journalism in general, since its inception. House Republicans have investigated the way in which NewsGuard has suppressed conservative news and views earlier this month, noting that the entity seems designed to suppress speech, and partners with the military for much of its funding.
Another key individual in this infrastructure is Mark Oppenheimer, who used to be a Professor at Yale, where he was the head of the Yale Journalism Initiative. This past May, Oppenheimer moved to St. Louis to work at Washington University for the John C. Danforth Institute for Religion and Politics. John C. Danforth, a former Missouri Senator and Missouri Attorney General, personally represents Freeman and Moss in their ongoing defamation lawsuit against the Gateway Pundit relating to claims Freeman and Moss were defamed as part of the Gateway Pundit’s reporting on 2020 voter fraud.
Another key link to the Biden censorship industrial complex is the Stanford Internet Observatory, founded in 2019 and funded with money by billionaire Craigslist.org founder Craig Newmark. Newmark also lavishly funds ‘disinformation’ and censorship efforts at Yale, among other colleges. Craig Newmark also annually funds the Yale Media Freedom of Information Access Clinic at Yale Law. Newmark’s site, Craigslist.org, was threatened in 2018 by the federal government for having facilitated human trafficking and sex trafficking in 2018. In response, Newmark deleted all personals and ads for hookers, many of which were alleged to have been underage.
That same year, Craig Newmark became a key private-money funder of much of the censorship complex, alongside other prominent funders such as George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation, alongside Google, Facebook, among others.
A ‘small donation’ for Newmark in this area of speech suppression and censorship is in the $50,000-100,000 range. You can see that in this email:
Steven Brill is a self-described journalist. He founded CourtTV in 1991, and set up a series of failed businesses. He wrote a series of unremarkable books, and then founded NewsGuard in 2018. He has been a professor of journalism at Yale since 2001. NewsGuard has been, by far, his most successful endeavor. NewsGuard is partnered with Big Tech and various agents of the Deep State, including former NSA Director Michael Hayden who is a part of NewsGuard. Hayden has famously called whistleblower Edward Snowden a ‘traitor’ and to WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange as an “information terrorist.” Brill is at the intersection of the Deep State, the Biden industrial censorship complex, elite mainstream journalism, and Yale University.
Brill, Oppenheimer, and Yale are also connected with one of Coney Barrett’s law clerks, Connor Mui.
Law Clerks typically work for a year in the federal judiciary, and assist Judges with research, drafting, and writing. Experts differ on the extent of their involvement, but it is well-known that many judges rely on their Clerks to research and write their entire opinions.
Justice Barrett’s law clerk Mui is a graduate of Yale Law School, along with his now-wife, Raleigh Cavero. Both Mui and Cavero are graduates of Yale Law School.
Mui and Cavero were married in December.
Yale is one of the epicenters of anti-free speech work in the country, funded and propelled by Soros‘ and Newmark’s billions.
Newmark helps fund NewsGuard. NewsGuard also receives money from the U.S. State Department and the U.S. military, ostensibly to “help fight disinformation.”
NewsGuard is funded with millions by the Deep State and Biden’s government, to aid in the operation of the Biden censorship industrial complex.
The guy who wrote Coney Barrett’s insane judicial opinion, one of the likely law clerk authors of the decision that let Joe Biden, NewsGuard, Yale, Steven Brill, Mark Oppenheimer, off of the hook for liability and lets them continue earning millions from Soros and Craig Newmark, is married to an attorney with significant connections to that censorship cabal, who prominently features both Brill and Oppenheimer on her resume carelessly left online.
There is no enforceable code of conduct for Supreme Court Justices to recuse themselves from a case, it is self-directed. Justices are supposed to recuse themselves when their impartiality might come into question. The far-left has been trying to force a recusal by Justice Clarence Thomas for things that his outspoken and courageous wife Ginny Thomas has done in her private capacity. The mainstream media regularly beats up on Justice Thomas for imaginary conflicts of interest.
More recently, the far-left has tried to force Justice Samuel Alito to recuse himself because he flew the flag of distress outside of his house around the time of the election. The New York Times even took the time to write about Justice Alito flying the “Appeal to Heaven” flag and why that might cause him to recuse himself in future cases because it was supposedly associated with January 6th protesters and Christianity.
Notably in 1950 when Soviet spy Alger Hiss appealed his perjury conviction to the Supreme Court, three justices recused themselves because of past close association with Hiss, including Hiss mentor Justice Felix Frankfurter, Hiss’ former boss at the Department of Justice Justice Stanley Reed, in addition to Justice Tom C. Clark.
Canon 3F(1) of the Code of Conduct for the Judiciary advises judicial employees, including law clerks, to avoid conflicts of interest for themselves and their spouses.
The Code states, in relevant part,
“Conflicts arise when you—or your spouse or other close relative—might be so personally or financially affected by a matter that a reasonable person would question your impartiality. The considerations that apply to a spouse also apply to a person with whom the clerk lives in an intimate relationship.”
Calls and emails to Raleigh Cavero, and the Public Information Office of the Supreme Court went unreturned and unanswered.
