Democrats in Congress are trying to pass a bill that would expand the definition of hate crime to include discussion of “replacement theory”.
The legislation, which is sponsored by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), would criminalize speech that is found to have “inspired” a racially motivated crime.
The draconian law would effectively make an individual responsible for someone else’s crime if prosecutors were able to successfully argue that their political rhetoric was a motivating factor.
The Leading Against White Supremacy Act of 2023 includes a “conspiracy” charge that someone would be guilty of if they were found to have published “material advancing white supremacy, white supremacist ideology, antagonism based on ‘replacement theory,’ or hate speech that vilifies or is otherwise directed against any non-white person or group” on social media.
If such content is “read, heard, or viewed by a person who engaged in the planning, development, preparation or perpetration of a white supremacy inspired hate crime,” even if misinterpreted, the creator of such content is guilty of conspiracy.
The creator is also guilty if someone “predisposed to engaging in any action in furtherance of a white supremacy” happens to stumble across it.
Critics pointed out that “vilifying” someone can include language that is merely harshly critical and not racist or false, while passing a new ‘hate speech’ law that only targets white people is itself racist.
The “replacement theory” language is incredibly ironic given that Democrats routinely discuss replacement theory, the idea that whites in the US are deliberately being replaced by non-white immigrants, in the context of it being a good thing.
However, when people on the right discuss the same issue only from a negative perspective, “replacement theory” suddenly because a dangerous conspiracy theory
Indeed, last year, President Joe Biden urged Americans to reject the same demographic “replacement theory” that he once cited as a “source of our strength”.
President Biden: "I believe anybody who echoes replacement theory is to blame – not for this particular crime – but it's for no purpose, no purpose except profit and/or political benefit. And it's wrong, it's just simply wrong." pic.twitter.com/sOdFUNm4SQ
— CSPAN (@cspan) May 17, 2022
During a White House Summit in early 2015, Biden said America being “flooded” with an “unrelenting” “wave” of immigrants was a good thing that Americans should be “proud of.”
“It’s not going to stop,” Biden said. “Nor should we want it to stop. As a matter of fact, one of the things I think we can be most proud of.”
“An unrelenting stream of immigration. Nonstop, nonstop. Folks like me who are Caucasian, of European descent, for the first time in 2017 [sic] we’ll be an absolute minority in the United States of America. Absolute minority,” Biden continued. “Fewer than 50% of the people in America from then and on will be white European stock. That’s not a bad thing. That’s a source of our strength.”
Biden also promoted replacement theory during a Zoom call with black civil rights leaders in December 2020.
“If we cannot make significant progress on racial equity, this country is doomed,” Biden said. “It is doomed.”
“Not just because of African-Americans, but because by 2040 this country is going to be minority white European,” Biden continued. “You hear me? Minority white European. And you guys are going to have to start working more with Hispanics, who make up a larger portion of the population than y’all do.”
Although Jackson’s bill has virtually no chance of passing and represents a clear violation of the First Amendment, the mere fact that it is being introduced illustrates how Democrats want to completely destroy free speech.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/
In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.
I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
Get early access, exclusive content and behind the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.
Prestigious Liberal Watchdog Condemns New York Times’ Russiagate Coverage
In short, the hyper-partisan ‘paper of record’ was operating in bad faith.
It’s wasn’t just the Times either. CJR’s findings accurately reflect what most objective thinkers have known this whole time – they were all operating in bad faith.
That said, CJR aimed the majority of criticism towards the NYT.
“No narrative did more to shape Trump’s relations with the press than Russiagate. The story, which included the Steele dossier and the Mueller report among other totemic moments, resulted in Pulitzer Prizes as well as embarrassing retractions and damaged careers,” wrote CJR executive editor Kype Pope in an editor’s note.
The findings were published in a lengthy, four-part series. The first section begins with a story about then-New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet’s reaction when he found out Special Counsel Robert Mueller didn’t plan to pursue Trump’s ousting, telling his staff “Holy s—, Bob Mueller is not going to do it.” –Fox News
“Baquet, speaking to his colleagues in a town hall meeting soon after the testimony concluded, acknowledged the Times had been caught ‘a little tiny bit flat-footed’ by the outcome of Mueller’s investigation,” according to Jeff Gerth – the author of CJR’s lengthy retrospective.
“That would prove to be more than an understatement,” he continued. “But neither Baquet nor his successor, nor any of the paper’s reporters, would offer anything like a postmortem of the paper’s Trump-Russia saga, unlike the examination the Times did of its coverage before the Iraq War.”
According to Gerth, the Times destroyed its credibility outside of its “own bubble.”
What’s more, the Times appeared to legitimize former British spy, Christopher Steele, who was indirectly paid by the Clinton campaign to fabricate the infamous ‘dossier’ that so much of the Russiagate coverage – and the DOJ’s sham investigation, was based on.
The Times appeared to legitimize Christopher Steele, the ex-British spy who authored the infamous dossier, claiming he had “a credible track record” while Steele’s so-called “primary” source was telling the FBI that Steele “misstated or exaggerated” in his report and that information stemming from Russia was “rumor and speculation.”
Part three offered examples of the Times’ slight-of-hand coverage against Trump in comparison to other hostile outlets. For example, Trump explained his decision to fire FBI Director James Comey, mentioning the “Russia thing” as being a “made-up story” to NBC’s Lester Holt but acknowledged the firing would likely “lengthen out the investigation.”
“The media focused on the ‘Russia thing’ quote; the New York Times did five stories over the next week citing the ‘Russia thing’ remarks but leaving out the fuller context. The Post and CNN, by comparison, included additional language in their first-day story,” Gerth wrote.
In another instance, the Times avoided covering some of the more damning texts from Peter Strzok, who wrote “there’s no big there, there” shortly after the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, something Gerth noted was covered by the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post. -Fox News
In closing, Gerth concluded that “the erosion of journalistic norms and the media’s own lack of transparency about its work” is responsible for the broad distrust in the media.
“In January 2018, for example, the New York Times ignored a publicly available document showing that the FBI’s lead investigator didn’t think, after ten months of inquiry into possible Trump-Russia ties, that there was much there. This omission disserved Times readers. The paper says its reporting was thorough and ‘in line with our editorial standards,” wrote Gerth. “Another axiom of journalism that was sometimes neglected in the Trump-Russia coverage was the failure to seek and reflect comment from people who are the subject of serious criticism. The Times guidelines call it a ‘special obligation.’ Yet in stories by the Times involving such disparate figures as Joseph Mifsud (the Maltese academic who supposedly started the whole FBI inquiry), Christopher Steele (the former British spy who authored the dossier), and Konstantin Kilimnik (the consultant cited by some as the best evidence of collusion between Russia and Trump), the paper’s reporters failed to include comment from the person being criticized.“This post was originally published at Zero Hedge
“One Lie After The Next”: CNN Ratings Hit 9-Year Lows After Reputational Suicide
Establishment mouthpiece CNN – an integral part of both the Russiagate hoax and the Hunter Biden laptop coverup, has dropped to just 444,000 average primetime viewers between January 16 and January 22, according to Nielsen.
Of those, just 93,000 were in the all-important 25-54 news demographic.
This is the first time since May of 2014 that the network has failed to reach 450,000 viewers, The Wrap reports.
By comparison, during the same period Fox News drew 1.4 million viewers and 176,000 in the demo while MSNBC notched 629,000 total viewers and 69,000 in the demo. In primetime, Fox News had 2 million viewers, 256,000 in the demo and MSNBC had 943,000 viewers and 91,000 in the demo.
Some especially troublesome news out of this week’s Nielsen numbers is that Licht’s primary programming move, “CNN This Morning,” also suffered the lowest week since its launch just three months ago. It averaged just 331,000 viewers while “Fox & Friends” had nearly 1 million and “Morning Joe” drew 760,000. -The Wrap
As Glenn Greenwald notes, CNN’s downfall is “so well-deserved and good for the country.”
According to CNN insiders, hosts of the network’s rebooted morning show, Don Lemon, Poppy Harlow and Kaitlan Collins, “seem to be growing frustrated” over the direction of the network.
“The show can’t decide strategically what exactly it is, so it’s trying to be everything which can create whiplash for a viewer when segments seem off-brand in tonality,” said one insider. “The audience for morning news on network TV is different than the cable news audience and since we’re not gaining new viewers we definitely need to retain our legacy ones.”
More on the network’s reputational suicide from Greenwald:This post was originally published at Zero Hedge
Video: Ted Cruz Calls For FBI Raid On Hunter Biden
“We need to ascertain who’s had access to what and when.”
Senator Ted Cruz declared Sunday that the FBI should immediately search the home of Hunter Biden to check for classified documents.
In the wake of such documents being discovered in Joe Biden’s home garage and an office he uses in Washington DC, Cruz noted “It seems he leaves classified documents wherever he goes. And we also know that Hunter Biden at times was — declared his residence to be those very same places.”
During the Fox News interview, Cruz added “I also believe it is critical for the FBI to search Hunter Biden’s homes, home and office residences to make sure there are no classified documents there, given all the evidence that’s piling up. We need to ascertain who’s had access to what and when.”
Cruz added that it is imperative that lawmakers find out whether documents Biden had “illegally” involve “family business activities and potential corruption.”
“Whether they involve Burisma and Ukraine, whether they involve Communist China and the entities that were paying the Biden family millions of dollars,” Cruz urged, adding “If he, in fact, had classified documents that implicate his own financial well-being, that raises the potential of very serious criminal liability.”
Cruz also highlighted an email Hunter Biden sent to a Burisma colleague, alleging the correspondence, which was obtained by the New York Post from the infamous laptop from hell, indicates he had access to classified material.
“Hunter Biden didn’t write that,” Cruz stated, explaining that “Hunter Biden is not an expert on Ukraine. He’s not an expert on Eastern Europe. He’s not an expert on Russia, but that email did help get him on the board of Burisma. It did help get him paid $83,000 a month because it showed a level of expertise not coming from him, but he was getting it from somewhere. That’s clearly from some sort of briefing. We don’t know whether it was a classified briefing or not, but that is the sort of analysis that is often within a classified briefing.”
Cruz continued, “there’s a level of scholarship and erudition that if it magically appeared, somehow it doesn’t appear in the other emails he’s sending.”
“The obvious question is what was he cutting and pasting from? What was his source? And it raises the natural inference that Hunter Biden had direct access to these classified documents,” Cruz asserted.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/
ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.
We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.
Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
Also, we urgently need your financial support here. ———————————————————————————————————————
clownworld3 days ago
London Police Recruiting Illiterate Officers Who Can Barely Write English to Meet Diversity Quotas
LGBT3 days ago
Video: Mother Reads Shocking Gay Porn Material Found In Minnesota School Direct To Board Members
LGBT7 days ago
Wisconsin Parents Outraged After Finding ‘Queer’ Porn In Children’s School Library
World at War6 days ago
Croatian President Calls Germany’s ‘We Are at War With Russia’ Comment “Madness”
censorship21 hours ago
News Outlets Announce They’re Abandoning “Objectivity” Because It’s Racist
U.S. News7 days ago
Video: Rand Paul Warns Overclassification Being Used To Cover Up COVID Lab Leak
Politics6 days ago
Biden Jokes About People Thinking He’s “Stupid” Then Makes Another Stupid Verbal Gaffe
censorship7 days ago
They Buried It