Monday Morning Breakfast For The Brain

CRAP! Busted back to zero again – it’s Monday!

FACEBOOK CENSORSHIP PART TWO: ZUCKERBERG, A “DANGEROUS” PERSON

By Ben Garrison

Facebook claims it has ‘community standards’ enforced to remove hate speech. In part one of this two part cartoon series, I proved that was a lie. To refresh memories, see the screen shot image as another example. Bear in mind that a Facebook spokesman recently said this:

“We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology,”

What I reported was clearly a ‘hate speech’ page, even though they were using my cartoons, which they vandalized to express their quest for murder. Facebook, as usual, said it did not violate their community standards. As long as conservatives are made to look like monsters, Zuckerberg seemed to be A-OK with it.

Now the CEO of Facebook is blatantly censoring conservative people such as Alex Jones, Paul Joseph Watson, Milo Yiannopoulos, and Laura Loomer. Facebook will not even allow on ‘his’ site praise for these people by others. Zuckerberg wants them digitally erased from history. He labeled them ‘dangerous individuals.’ The lefty media teamed up and parroted the defamation, calling them ‘controversial figures of hate.’ It’s all ridiculous, but at least Facebook’s lies have been exposed. We know how the Deep State, including the CIA and Silicon Valley, consider those of us who want to preserve our Republic to be ‘figures of hate.’

Silicon Valley companies will increasingly allow conservatives to be banned as we approach the 2020 election. What’s next, will they call us ‘terrorists?’ Will we be sent to gulags? Facebook now has around 2.7 billion users. People depend on it to easily connect with friends and family. It has become a public utility of sorts and it all may have started with CIA funding.

Before you call me a conspiracy theorist, consider that the CIA has for a long time been funding Silicon Valley tech companies that interest them. They created a venture capital firm called “In-Q-Tel,” and that firm helped fund many up-and-comers including Peter Thiel’s “Palantir,” which was an all-encompassing means to gather data on everything. Although Thiel is a self-professed ‘libertarian,’ his Palantir destroys privacy. It is literally the Eye of Sauron. In the hands of the CIA, it would make that institution that much more powerful and tyrannical. Thiel may have also recommended funding for Facebook.

He got in early and made a large part of his billions through Facebook stock. The CIA must love their honeypot that is Facebook. After all, billions of people voluntarily release their personal details. Zuckerberg loves it because he sells the dumb effers’ data to advertisers. Facebook users are also the product. Zuckerberg is the perfect nerdy front man for the CIA. As a bonus, Zuckerberg spent some time at Harvard, which is a known and very corrupt pipeline feeding the Deep State Swamp.

Now the billionaire tyrant wants to introduce a social credit system that rewards users for politically correct behavior on his platform. It sounds suspiciously similar to China’s system, designed to keep their citizens in line. Everyone there wants a high rating. Those with low ratings are unable to travel, get a loan, or even get a job. Zuckerberg wants that for Americans.

The CIA commands way too much power and control and they always want more. I doubt many taxpayers know they are funding their own enslavement by allowing a ‘security’ agency to fund Silicon Valley companies, who now control most of our digital free speech. The CIA seems to love billionaires like Zuckerberg, Soros, and Bezos, who are working together to silence patriots who value freedom.

Check Out all of Ben’s great cartoons and commentary HERE.

The Real Reason Democrats Hate Bill Barr

Via The Federalist

According to the law, Mueller’s job ended when he handed in his report to the attorney general. Yet Barr, who was under no legal obligation to release any of the findings, offered Mueller a chance to review his letter before sending it to Congress. Mueller reportedly declined, only offering his own summary after the Barr letter had been released.

For Democrats and their allies, an investigation “not clearing” someone makes that someone as good as guilty if he happens to be a Republican. Sen. Kamala Harris (D–CA) actually accused Barr of failing to revisit the underlying evidence in Mueller’s report before making a decision on obstruction. The same Democrats who acted apoplectic when Barr took a couple of weeks to go through redactions in the 400-page report want Trump’s AG to sift through the underlying evidence of a two-year, $35 million investigation and make his own recommendations … when, a year from now? What was the point of the Mueller report, then?

Barr accepted the finding of the special counsel and made his legal judgment based on the evidence and arguments as outlined by Mueller. If Democrats disagree with his legal reasoning, they have a constitutional remedy called impeachment. Are all the liberal pundits and news outlets pretending that Harris’s line of inquiry is shrewd, really arguing that Barr should act as if there might be a smoking gun buried in the evidence that Mueller himself didn’t deem worthy to bring forward in his report? What would the reaction be if Barr investigated and found the evidence less compelling than the Mueller report’s framing? Would Democrats accept Barr’s findings? It’s absurd, and another sign of how this is all just partisan bluster.

Another thing Mueller didn’t seem at all concerned about was whether the Trump-Russian collusion conspiracy had been initiated or stoked by Russians. Those clamoring for transparency when useful—now acting as if investigating how the entire country was thrown into a panic over non-existent Russian infiltration of the White House is absurd—are the true conspiracy theorists.

Read the entire article HERE.

Should Journalists Go to Jail for Spreading Russia Lies?

Via PJ Media

As a First Amendment maximalist, I am inclined to reply an automatic “no” to my own headline — should journalists go to jail for spreading Russia lies? But a penalty of some kind, indeed a serious one, should certainly be levied for misinforming the public on the most important subject of our day, which has happened repeatedly over the last few years concerning the Russia probe. And when these prevarications can be shown to have been deliberate, to have been done knowingly, difficult as that may be to prove, the line to sedition may have been crossed and there is an argument the reporters involved should face legal consequences. They should also be fired.

Unfortunately, because reporting is an occupation with no official standards like law or medicine, no professional organizations to disbar them, and because, as A. J. Liebling wrote long ago, “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one,” with media operations like CNN and NBC often encouraging those very lies, this is unlikely to happen.

Nevertheless. as Kimberly Strassel indicated in “For Fear of William Barr: The attorney general gets attacked because his probe endangers many powerful people,” heads of those who instigated the Russia probe are likely soon to roll. Shouldn’t members of the press who gave them voice be more than unindicted co-conspirators?

Read the entire article HERE.

CNN is More Dangerous Than Banned Voices

Via American Greatness

Well, the gradual censorship of right-wing voices took another lurch forward this week. Alex Jones, Laura Loomer, Milo Yiannopoulos, and Paul Joseph Watson are now all banned permanently from Facebook and their subsidiary, Instagram.

In fact, the tech giant that controls almost three-quarters of all social media interactions doesn’t just want to silence Alex Jones; it wants to erase him from existence. If you so much as share any content from Jones’ site Infowars, you might find yourself banned along with him and the others whom Facebook, Inc. has decided are too “dangerous” to have a voice.

I know about Jones’s plight from CNN. You know what CNN is. It’s the network that took the lead in promoting the false narratives that Michael Brown and others killed while violently resisting arrest were, instead, innocent victims of racist American cops. You might remember that photo of “CNN Newsroom” hosts Sally Kohn, Mel Robbins and Margaret Hoover with their hands in the air while their co-host Sunny Hostin held up a sign saying, “I can’t breathe.” The fake news about Michael Brown and others like Eric Garner who were killed while resisting lawful arrest was so widely broadcast that everyone knew exactly what the celebrity anchors meant without even seeing the so-called victims’ names. The smug and self-righteous look on their faces alone was almost enough to tell the tale.

Brown, who was 6-foot-4-inches and weighed 292 pounds, was shot and killed by a Ferguson, Missouri police officer on August 9, 2014. CNN and the rest of the corporate press spent the next couple of years reporting on any circumstance in which a black person died in an altercation with the police for which they could find someone who was willing to claim that the killing was unjustified. They not only didn’t caution against a “rush to judgment,” their coverage encouraged anyone foolish enough to listen to the overpaid, talentless hacks they hire to masquerade as journalists to believe that your typical American police officer started his day just hoping he’d have the chance to murder an innocent black man. The results were entirely predictable; minds already addled by years spent watching their poisonous product were set ablaze and violent eruptions ensued.

Read the entire article HERE.

TIME Oozes Gay Pride in ‘Devout Christian’ Pete Buttigieg for President

Via Newsbusters

TIME magazine in recent months has published a series of puffball cover stories for Democrats from Nancy Pelosi to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Now it’s time to celebrate Pete Buttigieg, next to the husband Chasten Buttigieg, with the words “First Family” on the cover. Doesn’t it seem a bit early for that kind of hype? But the gay pride was overwhelming. Paul Moakley — Editor at Large, Special Projects at TIME — bragged about the project and thanked the couple on Instagram:

Growing up as a gay kid in a conservative community at the height of AIDS, I never imagined I’d be producing the covers of @time, especially one with an openly gay presidential candidate. Thank you to @pete.buttigieg and his husband @chasten.buttigieg for opening their lives and home to us. Thanks to everyone in our incredible crew: photographer @ryanpfluger (who’s worked for for many years and finally has a cover), photo assistant @nicolbiesekphoto, writer @charlottealter, video crew @dianetsai_ and @francescatrianni, and cover design by @dwpine. #pride #time #petebuttigieg #firsts

Writer Charlotte Alter begins a very long cover story with Buttigieg being heckled in Iowa by The Devil, so to speak:

“Pete,” the Devil hissed into a microphone. “You’re sooo smart, Pete.”

Buttigieg ignored the heckler, plowing forward with his stump speech about American decency as his husband ­Chasten looked on. “Pete,” the Devil whispered. “I want the heartland, Pete.”

The man in the devil costume was Randall Terry, an antiabortion activist….

Terry is hardly the only right-winger worried about the rise of “Mayor Pete.” Buttigieg’s saying that “God doesn’t have a political party” prompted evangelical leader Franklin Graham to tweet that being gay is “something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized.”

Read the entire article HERE.

Be sure to subscribe to Def-Con News to get Breakfast For The Brain in your morning mailbox.