Patriot,

The "Twitter Files" are explosive revelations of political
censorship by a social media giant colluding with the federal
government and certain activist groups.

Of course, we only know about Twitter because it was acquired by
Elon Musk, who allowed the truth to be revealed. Without a doubt,
the same censorship regime exists at Google/YouTube,
Facebook/Instagram, and the other major social networks.

The topics being censored were precisely those that Campaign for
Liberty has fought for over the years: the truth about Covid,
masking, lockdowns, and the experimental vaccines. (Topics we
were right about all along.)

And there was also the direct political censorship of the Biden
family scandals: blatant election interference and political
manipulation.

Who knows what else they've hidden from you and me.

It was an ideal topic to kick off the House Weaponization of the
Federal Government subcommittee: flagrant First Amendment abuses
that were not the isolated product of private actors, but were
planned, coordinated, and executed with the active participation
of federal entities.

As I explain in my latest column, reproduced below, what followed
was a disgraceful attempt on the part of Democrat committee
members to bully, browbeat, and smear the journalists who
reported these facts.

And it shows how we must fight to defend our First Amendment
rights.

It's the distinction between freedom and fascism.

Read the full column below, and if you support Campaign for
Liberty's mission to defend the great American principles of
liberty - from freedom of speech to freedom of health, freedom of
privacy, and so much more - please support Campaign for Liberty
as we continue to inform and mobilize to defend these principles.

[link removed]

For Liberty,

Ron Paul


House Democrats Attack Messengers in 'Politicization of
Government' Hearing

I often joke that I survived Washington because I had low
expectations, but last week's hearing of the House Weaponization
of the Federal Government subcommittee would have tested the
lowest of my low expectations. The purpose of the subcommittee is
to look into the politicization of U.S. government agencies and
its effect on our civil liberties. But last week's inaugural
hearing of the committee was not at all a good look for the
Democrats, who brought nothing but insults for the witnesses.

Things got off on the wrong foot very quickly, as Democrat
committee Members seemed less interested in what witnesses Matt
Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger had to say than in attacking the
messengers. Ranking Committee Member Stacey E. Plaskett, a
Democrat from the Virgin Islands, began by calling Taibbi a
"so-called journalist" who poses a "direct threat" to people who
disagree with the work he has done on the "Twitter Files."

Taibbi, who to the likely dismay of the Democrats on the
subcommittee is hardly a right-wing Republican, corrected
Plaskett's smear, pointing out to her that, "I'm not a so-called
journalist. I've won the National Magazine Award, the I.F. Stone
Award for Independent Journalism, and I've written 10 books
including four New York Times bestsellers." In addition, Taibbi
pointed out that most of his journalism career was spent at
Rolling Stone Magazine, which is hardly a conservative political
outlet.

The Democrat decision to make this hearing a partisan political
issue and attack the journalists who brought us the truth about
secret U.S. government censorship-by-proxy of Americans who hold
views unacceptable to government elites is extremely unfortunate.
The Democrat decision to attack honest liberals like Taibbi for
bringing us the truth is baffling. Taibbi and Shellenberger and
the other journalists involved in exposing government malfeasance
in the Twitter Files have done a great service to all Americans
concerned about the collusion between government and corporations
to silence speech that the government does not like.

Matt Taibbi posted his statement to the subcommittee as another
episode in the "Twitter Files" series and it may have been the
most disturbing release to date. In this release Taibbi
documented what he calls the "Censorship-Industrial Complex."
This is the collusion not only between government and big tech to
censor "wrong" views, but also those parts of the so-called
"non-governmental" sector that are directly funded by government.


This "NGO" sector, it turns out, has been a key tool in the U.S.
government's efforts to censor Americans who fail to toe the U.S.
government line on everything from Covid to Ukraine. The
"non-government" organizations such as the National Endowment for
Democracy, the Atlantic Council's DFRLab, the Alliance for
Securing Democracy and dozens more pose as simply good citizens
concerned about disinformation while in fact they are mostly or
completely funded by the U.S. government to do the US
government's bidding.

Taibbi calls this the "absolute fusion of state, corporate, and
civil society organizations," but there is another word for it:
fascism.

And that is where we are headed in the United States unless all
of us - conservatives, libertarians, liberals, and progressives -
wake up and fight for the restoration of the First Amendment.


Support Campaign for Liberty:
[link removed]


If you'd prefer to donate via PayPal, please click here.
[link removed]

Join Ron Paul's Patriot Club with a monthly contribution! Your
support sustains our work and members are automatically entered
to receive special giveaways autographed by Ron Paul.
[link removed]


The mission of Campaign for Liberty is to promote and defend the
great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional
government, sound money, free markets, and a constitutional
foreign policy, by means of education, issue advocacy, and
grassroots mobilization.

© Campaign for Liberty, 2012. Paid for by Campaign for Liberty
and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Because of Campaign For Liberty's tax-exempt status under IRC
Sec. 501(C)(4) and its state and federal legislative activities,
contributions are not tax deductible as charitable contributions
(IRC § 170) or as business deductions (IRC §
162(e)(1)).

www.CampaignForLiberty.org


This message was intended for: [email protected]
You were added to the system June 27, 2019 [More information].
Update your preferences | Unsubscribe

----Powered by Paramount Communication----
[link removed]