Connect with us

Censorship

You won’t believe the racist reason the media just turned on Bernie Sanders

Published

on

The so-called “mainstream” media loves the far-left policies of Bernie Sanders.

But even that isn’t enough to get their love.

And you won’t believe the racist reason the media just turned on Bernie Sanders.

The media is constantly looking for racism.

They want you to believe that there is a white supremacist hiding behind every corner, and that they are the biggest problem in society.

It is a way to divide people over imaginary problems instead of the real problems in the world.

And at this point, their crusade to find racism is even eating their own.

The San Francisco Chronicle published an op-ed targeting socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, stating that he manifests “white privilege, male privilege, and class privilege.”

San Francisco Unified School District high school teacher Ingrid Seyer-Ochi penned the article in response to the viral image of Sanders at the recent presidential inauguration.

The photo shows a masked Sanders sitting, arms and legs crossed, with stitched mittens on his hands, and it somehow became one of the most shared images of the inauguration.

Her op-ed is titled, “S.F. high school students get a lesson in subtle white privilege,” and argued that his picture going viral is an example of racism, as he is a white male, and doesn’t showcase the diversity on display of the inauguration.

“We saw diversity, creativity and humanity, and a nation embracing all of this and more,” she writes. “On the day of the inauguration, Bernie Sanders was barely on our radar. The next day, he was everywhere.”

She goes on to attack Sanders for getting the attention he got, not on any of his views, but simply because of his race and gender.

“And there, across all of our news and social media feeds, was Bernie: Bernie memes, Bernie sweatshirts, endless love for Bernie,” she continued, before adding:

“I puzzled and fumed as an individual as I strove to be my best possible teacher. What did I see? What did I think my students should see? A wealthy, incredibly well-educated and privileged white man, showing up for perhaps the most important ritual of the decade, in a puffy jacket and huge mittens.”

The scariest part of this entire op-ed is that the person writing it is a school teacher, and she describes how she explained this point to the high school students she teaches.

Pants on Fire Official Polling

Censorship

One journalist’s lawsuit could end Big Tech censoring conservatives

Published

on

Social media companies suppressing conservative speech is getting out of hand.

Now someone is fighting back.

And one journalist’s lawsuit could end Big Tech censoring conservatives.

Twitter banned former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson for supposedly spreading “misinformation” about the coronavirus vaccine.

Berenson’s “crime” was posting that the COVID vaccine did not stop transmission of the virus.

In Berenson’s lawsuit, the former New York Times reporter argues that his comments were objectively true.

Berenson also cites California law, which defines common carriers as a platform that “offers to the public to carry persons, property, or messages.”

This argument could prove vital as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas hinted in an April opinion that Big Tech companies fall under the definition of a common carrier like the phone or mail company, which would limit the ability of Big Tech to censor speech.

Berenson also argued that Twitter acted as an agent of the government to censor his speech, citing Twitter banning Berenson shortly after Joe Biden called on Big Tech companies to censor “misinformation” about the coronavirus.

“The extraordinarily close nexus between the July 2021 statements by senior executive branch officials—including President Biden himself—calling for censorship by such companies and Twitter’s corresponding immediate actions against Mr. Berenson,” the lawsuit added.

There is already established case law that the government cannot pressure private companies to carry out actions that would be unconstitutional if the government performed them.

That argument – as well as the common carrier contention – lays out two legal paths for Berenson to argue his case and potentially find a receptive audience at the Supreme Court.

Conservatives waited for years for a manner in which to secure legal recourse to Big Tech’s ideologically motivated censorship.

Thanks to Berenson’s lawsuit and Big Tech’s overreach, they may have finally found a silver bullet.

Pants on Fire News will keep you up-to-date on any new developments in this ongoing story.

Continue Reading

Censorship

Big Tech is trying to censor one undeniable truth about the COVID vaccine

Published

on

Social media censorship is out of control.

Ever since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, Big Tech began banning users for posting true information.

And now Big Tech is trying to censor one undeniable truth about the COVID vaccine.

According to a new policy implemented by Twitter, the social media platform can now impose penalties up to a permanent suspension for posting that a vaccinated individual can spread COVID.

“When Tweets include misleading information about Covid-19, we may place a label on those tweets that includes corrective information about that claim,” Twitter’s policy reads. “We may apply labels to Tweets that contain, for example . . . false or misleading claims that people who have received the vaccine can spread or shed the virus (or symptoms, or immunity) to unvaccinated people.”

At the start of the pandemic, social media platforms banned users for posting that the virus likely escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China.

Now Twitter is threatening to ban anyone for posting truthful information about vaccinated individuals still being able to spread COVID.

Twitter’s new policy runs contrary to Centers for Disease Control guidelines that state that “risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection in fully vaccinated people cannot be completely eliminated as long as there is continued community transmission of the virus.”

In addition, Nature.com reported on a study published in October, which showed that fully vaccinated individuals possessed a lower risk of spreading COVID, but that spread was still possible and the vaccine’s protection against spread waned over time.

“The authors found that although the vaccines did offer some protection against infection and onward transmission, Delta dampened that effect. A person who was fully vaccinated and then had a ‘breakthrough’ Delta infection was almost twice as likely to pass on the virus as someone who was infected with Alpha. And that was on top of the higher risk of having a breakthrough infection caused by Delta than one caused by Alpha,” Nature.com reported.

One reason so many people do not trust either the vaccines or the authorities promising the vaccines are safe and effective is because no one allows an honest discussion of the vaccines.

Any hint that the vaccines may not be 100% perfect is labeled as misinformation, a conspiracy theory or “anti-vaxx.”

But Twitter censoring people for posting an honest fact that vaccinated people – while at lower risk – can still spread the coronavirus leaves people with the impression that elite institutions have something to hide.

Pants on Fire News will keep you up-to-date on any new developments in this ongoing story.

Continue Reading

Censorship

The Washington Post censored Donald Trump over this 2020 election claim

Published

on

America’s corporate-controlled media is now in the business of suppressing news it worries will hurt the Democrat Party.

But one person is the biggest victim of this Soviet-style propaganda.

And now The Washington Post censored Donald Trump over this 2020 election claim.

The Washington Post recently published a lengthy series reinforcing the corporate-controlled media narrative that the events of January 6 were a Trump-inspired white supremacist insurrection.

That media storyline is now collapsing because of Tucker Carlson’s investigative series Patriot Purge.

The Post reached out to Donald Trump for comment, and Trump submitted a lengthy response attacking The Post’s story telling.

But in a stunning move, The Post openly bragged about how they refused to print Trump’s statement in full because Trump questioned the results of the 2020 election.

The Post provided Trump a list of 37 findings reported as part of its investigation. His spokesman Taylor Budowich provided a lengthy written response that included series of unrelated, inflammatory claims that The Post is not publishing in full,” The Post wrote.

“The media’s obsession with the January 6th protest is a blatant attempt to overshadow a simple fact: there is no greater threat to America than leftist journalists and the Fake News, which has avoided a careful examination of the fraudulent 2020 election,” Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich said in the portion of the statement The Post printed.

It used to be considered fairness in journalism to reach out to the subject of a story and present their comment in full so that way readers could judge for themselves what to make of the story the paper published as well as the subject’s comments on the matter.

But in 2021, the corporate-controlled media now believes some views are too dangerous to expose Americans to.

Instead, the corporate-controlled media has settled on the idea that the press must carefully curate what gets reported to the public in order to make sure the media’s preferred narrative is the story the public hears.

The Washington Post freely admits this is the case by censoring Donald Trump’s response to their story to make sure the only comments from Trump the public can read line up with what The Post wants the public to believe about January 6.

Pants on Fire News will keep you up-to-date on any new developments in this ongoing story.

Continue Reading

Sign Up For FREE Alerts

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Trending