Connect with us

Censorship

YouTube just censored Ron Paul for this insane reason

Published

on

Big Tech refuses to stop censoring conservative voices.

The latest attempt to silence a prominent voice on the right will blow your mind.

And YouTube just censored Ron Paul for this insane reason.

Former Texas Congressman and Presidential candidate Ron Paul reported that YouTube shut down his Ron Paul Institute YouTube channel with no strikes, no warnings, and no explanations.

Former Congressman Paul is a vocal critic of lockdowns and mask and vaccine mandates.

YouTube also censored his son Kentucky Senator Rand Paul’s channel over supposed “misinformation” on coronavirus.

YouTube defines misinformation as any point of view the Democrat Party holds at any given moment.

But in reality, what’s misinformation today is accepted fact tomorrow.

Under YouTube’s standards, anyone who promoted mask-wearing in March 2020 should be banned because Dr. Fauci mocked the idea of mask wearing.

Likewise, YouTube once censored any video that claimed the coronavirus escaped from a lab in Communist China.

All the available evidence suggests that is the highly probable origin story for the pandemic.

But YouTube’s censorship has nothing to do with truth or stopping the spread of misinformation.

If that were the case, YouTube would ban CNN’s channel for all the lies and disinformation CNN spread about Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, Russian bounties on U.S. troops, or Trump supporters beating officer Brian Sicknick to death with a fire extinguisher on January 6.

Instead, the point of YouTube’s rules is to censor voices on the Right – like Ron Paul – so Americans can only digest information from left-wing sources ahead of the 2022 and 2024 elections.

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

Censorship

The woman who accused Chris Cuomo of sexual harassment made this stunning admission

Published

on

CNN’s Chris Cuomo is once again in the hot seat.

Many are wondering if his job is on the line.

And now the woman who accused Chris Cuomo of sexual harassment made this stunning admission.

Journalist Shelley Ross dropped a bombshell in a New York Times op-ed when she accused CNN anchor Chris Cuomo of sexually harassing her when the two were colleagues at ABC.

Ross wrote that at a colleague’s going away party, Cuomo hugged her and squeezed her buttocks in full view of Ross’ husband.

In the op-ed, Ross included the email Cuomo sent her the next day apologizing for his action.

Cuomo responded by downplaying the incident.

“As Shelley acknowledges, our interaction was not sexual in nature. It happened 16 years ago in a public setting when she was a top executive at ABC. I apologized to her then, and I meant it,” Cuomo stated.

Ross was not happy with Cuomo’s comments telling Insider that she still considered him a harasser.

“I was hoping that in 15, 16 years that he had changed, but he’s no more enlightened today than he was then, as demonstrated by his response,” Ross stated.

“I don’t acknowledge that there’s anything that was ‘our interaction.’ I was not a participant,” Ross added. “I was groped. And so to say that I acknowledge interaction, no. That shows a lack of enlightenment.”

It does not appear that CNN will take any action against Cuomo.

This is the second time Cuomo found himself in hot water about a sexual harassment scandal.

Last May, Cuomo got caught advising his brother Andrew Cuomo on how he could survive the sexual harassment scandal that eventually forced him to resign as the Governor of New York.

But it appears that CNN network President Jeff Zucker has far more tolerance than others for Chris Cuomo’s conduct.

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

Continue Reading

Censorship

This top journalist’s resignation proves free speech is on dangerous ground

Published

on

Cancel culture is giving rise to dangerous censorship.

Democrat Congressmen and corporate-controlled media outlets like CNN are literally trying to get Fox News removed from television.

And this top journalist’s resignation proves free speech is on dangerous ground.

Prince Harry and actress Meghan Markle have fueled media firestorms for years because of their childish behavior.

It culminated in an exasperating exclusive interview with Oprah Winfrey in which the Sussex Royals played the motherlode of all victimhood cards.

The couple complained about not having around-the-clock security provided by the British government despite the fact they renounced their titles.

The two also dropped a bombshell by accusing a member of the Royal Family of being racist.

Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan said he didn’t believe their shocking claims in the interview, and wasn’t shy about letting people know.

Morgan walked off the set and quit in the middle of a broadcast when the program’s weatherman berated Morgan on his own show for several minutes.

Worse yet, Markle lodged a formal complaint to Ofcom (the Office of Communications for the United Kingdom) in response to Morgan’s comment.

This is deeply disturbing because unlike the FCC in America, Ofcom has sharp teeth and can have British citizens mired in serious legal trouble.

The UK does not have a constitution that guarantees freedom of speech, so people can actually go to jail for “hate speech.”

Morgan stood tall in the face of the princess’ harassment campaign and fired back:

So far, there appears to be a lot of support in Morgan’s corner.

A petition to bring him back to Good Morning Britain gained over 200,000 signatures, and a recent UK public opinion poll showed that support for the Sussex Royals is done.

Harry’s favorability numbers were under water for the first time ever (45% to 48%; -3), and Meghan’s dropped 14 points from just over a week ago (31% to 58%; -27).

Pants on Fire Official Polling

Continue Reading

2020 election

TIME Magazine just shockingly admitted how corporate America stole the election from Trump

Published

on

By

The Fake News Media successfully carried Joe Biden into the White House.

But they wanted validation for their behind-the-scenes scheming.

So TIME Magazine just shockingly admitted how corporate America stole the election from Donald Trump.

Joe Biden won the 2020 election despite many voter irregularities.

For example, thousands of ballots in Wisconsin that did not have return addresses were counted when such ballots would’ve been disqualified in the past.

But the real work to secure the election for Biden was done behind the scenes by left-wing operatives, the corporate press, and Big Tech.

Journalist Molly Ball admitted as such in a 6,000+ word piece in TIME Magazine.

She detailed how shadow organizations conspired to “fortify” the election for Biden.

Ball wrote:

“That’s why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream – a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it.”

That is a truly amazing paragraph because it confirms everything Trump and other Republicans and conservatives have been saying about the corporate media and other institutions.

The article doesn’t even touch on Big Tech censoring the New York Post’s scoop about Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell.”

Facebook spokesman Andy Stone admitted the platform slowed the dissemination of the story, and Twitter flat-out blocked it and suspended the official account for the New York Post.

Twitter users weren’t even allowed to share The Post’s link via private message.

Perhaps one of the most fascinating parts in Ball’s article highlights how leftist organizations were prepared to send their shock troops out in the streets when Trump was ahead in the polls.

The story continued:

“The conversation that followed was a difficult one, led by the activists charged with the protest strategy. ‘We wanted to be mindful of when was the right time to call for moving masses of people into the street,’ [Angela] Peoples says. As much as they were eager to mount a show of strength, mobilizing immediately could backfire and put people at risk . . . So the word went out: stand down. Protect the Results announced that it would ‘not be activating the entire national mobilization network today, but remains ready to activate if necessary.’ On Twitter, outraged progressives wondered what was going on. Why wasn’t anyone trying to stop Trump’s coup? Where were all the protests?”

This is telling because if the entire point of the project was to “fortify” the election regardless of who wins, Trump leading in the polls should not have been a reason to send out the activists.

Trump was excoriated by the Left for telling the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by” during a debate (after he was pestered and prompted to do so) when that’s precisely what left-wing operatives did.

In their own words, leftists admit that they conspired to “fortify” the election, but in their eyes, only one result was acceptable.

Pants on Fire Official Polling

Continue Reading

Sign Up For FREE Alerts

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

Trending