Matt Taibbi isn’t a conservative reporter. He is a classical liberal who has called out his side numerous times for being creepy regarding the First Amendment and free speech rights. He and other reporters wrote extensively about the Twitter Files, which exposed the social media company's thought control and censorship operation. It was a joint venture with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He’s also a Russian collusion skeptic, highlighting this fake news story as one where members of the Democratic Party have lost the plot.
He was subjected to a mysterious IRS audit when testifying about the overall censorship industrial complex, which has been codified in Europe and is trying to be imported here; many of these operations were funneled through USAID schemes. Taibbi is filing a defamation lawsuit against a Democratic congresswoman who accused him of being a serial sexual harasser at a House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee last week.
Taibbi knew he was on the untrustworthy list at the Biden White House because a) his reporting was independent, and b) he allegedly did something unsavory in Russia. It led to the Biden State Department trying to discredit Taibbi. His piece spoke about the rest of that hearing, specifically, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) going after Republican hypocrisy over being targeted for censorship. She cited the ICE raids on college campuses of pro-terrorist students and their visas getting revoked. Taibbi noted the provision in the Patriot Act that both parties left unchanged: the ideological exclusion provision, which has been active since 2006.
The former Rolling Stone editor notes that he likely wouldn’t agree with Jayapal on much, but why can’t we have free speech and the destruction of these censorship apparatuses that ironically would get Jayapal in trouble in places like Europe (via Racket News):
Everything you need to know about modern Democrats, particularly so-called progressives, is encapsulated in the fact that instead of turning to the witness with a lifetime of First Amendment advocacy, Jayapal opened the floor to Nina Jankowicz, a former Homeland Security official who came within a hair of becoming America’s first “Disinformation Governance” chief.
“Ms. Jankowicz, to clarify for my Republican colleagues,” Jayapal began (independents don’t exist in Congress, even when we sit in witness chairs), “is it true that the Constitution guarantees lawful permanent residents the right to free speech?”
While Jankowicz answered in the affirmative, my first thought was about a 2006 case filed against the Departments of Homeland Security and State over the so-called “ideological exclusion provision” of the PATRIOT Act, which was endorsed by both parties and used to bar immigrants for speech reasons long before Trump. It was a provision politicians had a chance to change for years, and didn’t.
[…]
“Is it true,” Jayapal said, “that engaging in peaceful protests is protected by the First Amendment?”
“That’s right, Congresswoman.”
I felt like screaming: Why can’t we have both? Why can’t we protect the right to protest and get rid of this horrendous digital censorship apparatus? What is it about Democrats and this issue? The party once had civil libertarians in its ranks. Where did they go?
Then I remembered how the hearing began. This is just who they are.
All political groups try to neutralize their critics, but the Democrats’ habit of turning on their own supporters, and casting them as monsters and moral reprobates in elaborate PR campaigns, is unique. If you make the mistake of trying to understand it, as I did for years, it can consume your life. No longer wondering why is what allowed the quick response this time.
Since 2017 I’ve been in a club that includes Glenn Greenwald, Joe Rogan, Jimmy Dore, Tulsi Gabbard and a long list of others, including non-Americans like Julian Assange and others whose cases are still unfolding. Commonalities include accusations of sexual indiscretion, secret affiliation with Russia or some other foreign power, and financial corruption. Enemies are always evil, not mere disagreers. That vehemence is what stands out. They don’t just excommunicate, they hate. It’s the only sincere part left. Not getting hopes up, but maybe now we’ll find out why?
Why is there such misdirected hostility? The Glenn Greenwald ostracization is another sign that this party is and will forever be an authoritarian engine. Greenwald isn’t even a tenth conservative in his views, but he won’t hold fire when he sees Democrats acting crazy. Part of that is liberals not having Trump derangement syndrome 24/7. It’s almost as if you’re a traitor and unpatriotic if you don’t participate blindly in the two minutes of hate liberals seem to have every day over the smallest, most trivial matters.
It goes to policy positions, too—you cannot question anything. The critical thinking and being subjected to potential falsification, that fear has made the modern Democrat a Mao-lite acolyte. Has anyone wondered why RFK, Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, and Elon Musk are with us? Their only sin was speaking against the prevailing narrative that their former party was trying to sell. That’s it.
This madness to hate those considered traitors to the party, those supporting free speech, even the things they disagree with, and being willing not to be miserable 24/7 has contributed to the Democrats’ epic fall with voters. They’re in their worst shape in 50 years, and maybe they can stop screaming at everyone and everything for five minutes to turn things around.