Newsletter | December 8, 2022
The truth has brought down kingdoms and empires. As the wreckage and ruins of every tyranny throughout history show — as sure as the sun will rise, the truth will come out. And the First Amendment, enshrining our God-given right to speak freely, is grounded in this reality. It’s no wonder we’ve seen a frontal assault on this most cherished of our constitutional rights.
Here at America’s Future, we’re wary of investing too much confidence in any member of America’s oligarch class when it comes to honoring our inalienable rights. But when the world’s richest man does the right thing, he deserves credit. As the new owner of Twitter, Elon Musk shed light on the past role his company has played interfering in US elections and violating the First Amendment.
We already knew that social media platforms were part of a large operation of collusion among US government agencies, political operatives, and the legacy press to affect election outcomes. But last week, Musk furnished evidence from inside the belly of the beast to show how bad it truly is.
The truth always comes out. Our system was designed to facilitate this fact. You can censor people and shut them up, but it works for only so long. The more you try to fight the truth, the more resources you deploy to stop it, the more powerful the truth becomes.
Before Musk, Twitter was at the forefront of this attack. At the urging of government agencies — in particular, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security — the social media platform deliberately censored Americans. We knew it was happening and now we are seeing it in “black and white.”
At times it was to block news reports damaging to the ruling class’s preferred candidates – “the laptop from hell,” for example. In other instances, it was to silence in order to prevent medical experts from challenging the official COVID-19 narratives that caused so much financial, psychological, and emotional damage to our great country. And at other times, Twitter simply blocked prominent voices that mocked the progressive consensus, like actor James Wood and so many other American patriots.
By releasing some of the company’s internal documents, Musk opened a window to let the truth in. The sunlight exposed the culprits undermining the integrity of our elections and keeping us from exercising our constitutional right to free speech. So, we’re celebrating an important win — even as we know the struggle for the Republic continues.
Those who mean to destroy our Constitutional Republic are not going away, but neither are we. We didn’t choose this fight; it chose us, and we welcome it.
Please participate in our Reader’s Survey. We appreciate your time and are grateful for your insightful comments and thoughts. We read them all and share some of them every Monday at 9 a.m. during America’s Future live broadcasts with our Executive Director Mary O’Neill on America’s Mondays With Mary. Thank You!
The Time To Strike Is Now –
Defend & Protect Our Children
The well-being of children in America is under assault. Thousands of children are inflicted with unimaginable pain and suffering in our society today through trafficking, neglect, exploitation, and abuse that go unabated.
These despicable actions against the most vulnerable are caused by predators, including cartels crossing into our country through the open southern border selling children for sex and slave labor, to government agencies and NGOs’ that are too often willing partners in the neglect of our children in their care, to schools exploiting children by forcing curriculum in classrooms that defy morality and decency, to politicians and policy-makers whose failure to act allows the nightmare of horrors imposed on our children to escalate in America.
This tragedy must end and the time to strike is now. America’s Future intends to lead the charge.
This week, America’s Future announced that it has launched Project Defend & Protect Our Children (PDPC) – one of the nation’s most aggressive and comprehensive initiatives as part of its mission to protect the individual rights of all Americans, including children, and promote strong American families as the cornerstone to the survival of our communities and the Republic.
The Project will be overseen by a team of acclaimed experts and leaders in the professional areas of the protection and rescue of exploited and trafficked children, investigative journalism, law, policy development, and business. Members of the team, called The Little Flower Advisory Board, branded as such with a single white rose representing the delicate nature and precious life of a child, include America’s Future board member Lara Logan, Bazzel Baz, Jaco Booyens, Lynz Piper-Loomis, and Liz Crokin, among others.
The expert team of advisors will focus PDPC’s work in the areas of education and policy development, law and research, and media production and communications to achieve the following objectives: 1) Expose the causes and truth of child exploitation and trafficking; 2) Educate the public with the facts to raise awareness that this tragedy requires a nationwide response starting in our communities and states, and 3) Eradicate child trafficking and the exploitation of children in America once and for all.
No single organization in the nation has gathered the team of experts necessary to take on the scope that this initiative requires, and with America’s Future, they will not stop until the reprehensible horrors of child trafficking and exploitation ends.
As part of the Project’s strategy, America’s Future intends to expand its national champion-leaders network in 2023 with a dedicated force committed to advancing the Project’s goals and objectives. It will also conduct a historic review of policies and laws at the local, state, and national levels to identify those that are not enforced or no longer serve the welfare and well-being of children so as to create change and establish new policies that truly benefit children.
America’s Future urge all Americans to join this effort and be fearless in taking a stand and speaking up. Every child has the right to be nurtured, protected, defended, and to always feel safe. Children hold the promise and dreams of the future of America – they are, in fact, the future of America.
To learn more about PDPC, its Little Flower Advisory Board members, and how to get involved and support this initiative, visit Project Defend & Protect Our Children.
The announcement of the Project was made before hundreds of America’s Future supporters and donors at its 76th-anniversary celebration at The Mar-a-Lago Club-Palm Beach on December 6, 2022, hosted by Lt. General Michael T. Flynn USA, (Ret.), America’s Future Board Chair. Watch a video below of the announcement by America’s Future Executive Director Mary O’Neill at the start of the event.
America’s Future Files SCOTUS Amicus Brief in Big Tech Censorship Case
On Wednesday, December 7, 2022, America’s Future, along with two other nonprofit organizations, submitted an Amicus brief to the Supreme Court of the United States in Gonzalez v Google, Dkt. No. 21-1333 (2022), a case that may provide specific circumstances or conditions that, if present, will expose big tech internet providers, such as Google, to civil liability for injuries suffered by an aggrieved party that is caused by big tech’s manipulation of information optimization decisions.
Our brief offers the Court real-world context, a fresh perspective, along with insight and information bearing on the legal and factual issues arising out of this case, pursuant to Section 230(c)(1) and (c)(2) of the 1996 Communications Decency Act (CDA), a statute that provides certain protection from liability to internet companies who provide a user-interactive service.
This case comes to the SCOTUS based on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to uphold the trial court’s dismissal reasoning, “‘recommendations and notifications [i.e., Google’s algorithmic decisions, are] meant to facilitate the communication and content of others,’ and ‘not content in and of themselves.’”
Briefly, the facts of this case are as follows – in 2015, a young American woman, Nohemi Gonzalez, was killed in an ISIS terror attack in Paris. Plaintiffs, in this case, include grieving family members and the estate of the victim decedent, Ms. Gonzalez. Plaintiffs elected to sue Google (which owns YouTube) based on the theory Google is at fault for the death of Ms. Gonzalez because Google’s algorithmic controls of YouTube’s video search results recommended users view ISIS recruiting videos that communicated the terrorist group’s message, sought new recruits, and furthered the mission of ISIS. Plaintiffs further allege these “targeted results” promoted ISIS and contributed to its growth and capabilities, which ultimately led to the untimely and devastating loss of their loved one. Plaintiffs further argue Google shared advertising revenue with ISIS for paid advertisements in connection with the ISIS recruiting videos.
From a more global perspective, this case centers around algorithmic censorship, suppression, and/or promotion of certain information and user content by social media platforms and “big tech” giants like YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Google, Yahoo!, and Bing and whether Section 230 is broad or limited in scope. Likely, the use and misuse of discretionary algorithmic coding by big tech companies to skew search results, potentially injuring users, will likely play a big role in the explanation of the eventual ruling in this case.
Significantly, as Elon Musk continues to shed light on big government, big tech, and big media joining together as if co-conspirators in one big lawless enterprise, legal scholars contemplate whether this case will shed light on how SCOTUS might handle future civil or criminal cases against the US government and/or corrupt government officials for criminal conduct, First Amendment violations or some case-mix of the two. Section 230 should certainly not be strong enough to overcome Constitutional scrutiny if the use by big tech amounts to proxy censorship or “censorship by surrogate” in favor of the government.
To this point, our Amicus brief explains in plain terms,
If decisions are being made behind the scenes by government officials determining who may participate in social media and what positions they may take, then Section 230 serves the government’s interest to avoid discovery into such secretive and unconstitutional forms of control of the marketplace of ideas.
These days, we are learning, in real-time, the dangers of living in a cyber-based “big tech, big government” universe where abuse of authority combined with a simple keystroke can create false narratives forming depraved prosecutions and political persecutions. This perfect storm violates our God-given liberties at every turn.
Our brief discusses, in detail, various examples of government officials applying immense pressure on big tech to suppress and censor undesirable political speech or face severe regulatory challenges including casting away Section 230 altogether. Examples raised include direct control over a social media website and the handling of information concerning COVID-19, election challenges, climate change, etc.
The brief recognizes this complex issue and offers insight into resolving this deeply concerning current-day societal problem. Our Amicus brief suggests to the Court, as follows,
This thorny problem of government control over the Internet could be substantially remedied if courts carefully construe Section 230 so that it only immunizes decisions made by providers that meet the statutory preconditions.
The provider decision must be made alone (without government influence or coercion) to ban only the specific types of content that the statute allows the provider to ban (which most certainly does not include content viewed as politically objectionable to the provider or the government)…
When these companies surrender their operations to government control, they are no longer acting voluntarily or in good faith as Section 230 requires, and thus are no longer entitled to the liability shield provided by that section.
We, at America’s Future, pray that for the sake of saving a civil, decent society and to further the survival of our nation, the SCOTUS heeds our insight and holds to account those who are willing to destroy America.
Editor’s Note: For more information on this case, read our previous article on this case: SCOTUS To Decide Blockbuster Social Media Censorship Case In October 2022 Term
“America” is the Perfect Gift
This is the fifteenth article in our series on the nation’s premier law enforcement agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and its self-destruction over time.
For the last six years, the American people have been told their elections are being influenced by evil forces. First, the leftwing media were obsessed with FBI claims of Russian “election interference.” When Americans no longer responded to that lie, just days before the 2022 Congressional elections, the FBI joined in warning about a new threat — that “domestic violent extremists pose heightened threat to midterm elections.” Well, it turned out that this threat was no more real than that posed by Russia. Hiding in plain sight is the fact that the most significant interference in the last several federal election cycles has come from those who claimed to be protecting us — the FBI.
2016 Presidential Election. In mid-2016, the FBI terminated a legitimate investigation in Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified materials in order to remove the threat of an “FBI investigation” from looming over her during the months leading up to the November 2016 election.’
Then, in August 2016, supposedly non-political, supposedly independent, supposedly highly professional FBI employees were scheming to stop Donald Trump from being elected President. Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page were exchanging texts sharing their hatred for Trump and commitment to ensuring he lost the election. “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” texted Page, to which Strzok responded, “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.” They did their best. Under the name “Operation Crossfire Hurricane,” the FBI concocted a story that the Donald Trump campaign had “colluded” with Russia to (somehow) influence the 2016 election.
In reality, the FBI’s “investigation” relied almost entirely on the now discredited “Christopher Steele dossier.” Years later, a December 9, 2019 Department of Justice Inspector General report revealed that Steele had actually been paid by the Hillary Clinton campaign to develop “opposition research” on Trump. When the FBI couldn’t corroborate the allegations in Steele’s “dossier,” it then offered Steele $1 million to develop some corroboration. Your tax dollars in the hands of the FBI were hard at work — to undermine our elections.
2018 Congressional Election. The “Russia collusion” hoax was not limited to the 2016 Presidential election. It continued well into the 2018 midterm election cycle. In May 2017, shortly after President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate Russian involvement in President Trump’s election. “The 22-month-long Mueller investigation cast a shadow over the first two years of Trump’s presidency and loomed large over the 2018 midterm elections.” Of course, the Mueller team included Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.
2020 Presidential Election. The FBI went back to its book of “dirty tricks” to affect the 2020 Presidential Election to cover up the Hunter Biden laptop scandal. It was not until much later that Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) released information from FBI whistleblowers showing that in 2020, “FBI officials sought to falsely portray as disinformation evidence acquired from multiple sources that provided the FBI derogatory information related to Hunter Biden’s financial and foreign business activities, even though some of that information had already been or could be verified.” Unfortunately, the whistleblower information was not released until July 2022 — well after the 2020 election.
Computer repairman John Paul Mac Isaac became alarmed at the information he saw on Hunter Biden’s laptop. He became even more alarmed when he reported what he found to the FBI, and was warned by an FBI agent to remain silent about what he had found. The Agent “turned around and told me that, in their experience, nothing ever happens to people that don’t talk about these things,” Mac Isaac said.
The FBI not only refused to investigate the laptop, but went to great lengths to portray the Hunter Biden story as “misinformation,” all the while knowing it was true. And the Bureau brought others into its conspiracy. On August 25, 2016, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted that the social media giant suppressed stories about the Hunter Biden laptopafter the FBI advised Facebook that “there was a lot of Russian propaganda on the [prior] 2016 election,” and that “basically there’s about to be some kind of dump similar to that” related to the laptop.
Later polls revealed that nearly 30 percent of voters would have been less likely to vote for Biden — including 15 percent of Democrats — had they known that Biden likely lied about Hunter Biden’s business dealings with Ukraine. Thus, it is highly likely that the FBI — the enforcement arm of the Deep State — “elected” Joe Biden as President of the United States.
2022 Congressional Election. Just three months before the mid-term elections, on August 7, 2022, about 30 federal agents executed a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago, a totally unprecedented raid of the home of a former President. The full story of the FBI plan for the search is not yet known, so speculation abounds. By one report, “The FBI’s raid of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence was aimed at finding evidence…which Democrats want to blame on Mr. Trump ahead of the midterms in November and the 2024 presidential election.” Former CIA analyst Fred Fleitz believed the raid was a fishing expedition and “a cover story to find information to prosecute or indict Trump on other issues.”
2024 Presidential Election. On November 15, 2022, one week after the midterm elections, President Trump announced he would run for President in the 2024 election. It did not take long for the FBI election machine to swing into action. Only three days later, on November 18, 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed John Smith as a Special Counsel to investigate efforts by President Trump and his allies to challenge the results of the 2020 Presidential Election.
Even Justice Department supporters admit that Trump’s 2024 announcement affected the DOJ’s timeline to seek charges with the aid of documents seized by the FBI at Mar-a-Lago. “With the 2024 primaries in mind, the Justice Department likely has a ‘target end date of 2023’” for bringing any charges against Trump, noted former Obama federal prosecutor Barb McQuade — even while attempting to characterize the bringing of charges before the primaries as somehow staying out of the election cycle.
If America is to continue as a Constitutional Republic, this election interference from the FBI cannot be allowed to continue. If the American people want to prevent the FBI from deciding who will be elected President in 2024, the new majority in the House of Representatives — which has the power of the purse — will need to totally defund the FBI and bring an end to the FBI’s undermining of American elections.
To read the entire series of articles, please click here.
Reminders & Updates
AMERICA’S MONDAYS WITH MARY: Tune in every Monday morning at 9 a.m. (ET) to watch our Executive Director Mary O’Neill report out on the comments and insights submitted via our weekly Reader Survey and listen to updates about America’s Future activities and what’s ahead at America’s Mondays With Mary.
STAY CONNECTED: You’ll find America’s Future on your favorite social media platforms. Thank you for remembering to follow us and please share our posts.
Support America’s Future
America’s Future is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
All donations are tax-deductible to the full extent of the law.