Ukrainian MP placed on state-backed ‘kill list’

RT | July 16, 2024
Notorious Ukrainian website Mirotvorets has blacklisted MP Mariana Bezuglaya for repeatedly targeting the country’s senior military officials.
The database was created to collect and track personal data on people whom anonymous moderators consider enemies of Ukraine. Some of the individuals have been killed after being doxxed by the website.
Bezuglaya, who is a member of Vladimir Zelensky’s Servant of the People party, was added to the “kill list” on Monday along with a list of accusations against her. These included “interference with the lawful activities of the Armed Forces of Ukraine,” “discreditation and demoralization” of the army, and working to cause a “split” in Ukrainian society.
Mirotvorets also claimed that the MP had leaked state secrets that Russia could use to its benefit. The website added that Bezuglaya had deliberately projected an image of an “irredeemably stupid f**king fool” as part of her subversive ploy.
Days earlier, the MP, who sits on the National Security, Defense and Intelligence committees, accused Ukraine’s top general, Aleksandr Syrsky, of mismanaging the army. The lawmaker claimed that the senior military official wanted to capitulate to Russia and prevent more competent officers from stopping that.
Bezuglaya has a record of verbally attacking Ukrainian generals, including Syrsky’s predecessor, Valery Zaluzhny. Zelensky fired the top commander in February, after he publicly acknowledged that attempts to push Russian forces back had resulted in a “stalemate,” contradicting the Ukrainian leader.
Following her allegations, Bezuglaya was stripped of her role as the head of a parliamentary subcommittee, but remains the deputy chair of the security committee. She has described the development as irrelevant and an attempt to punish her for “telling the truth.” Her inclusion on Mirotvorets was part of the same pressure campaign, she claimed.
The controversial online project was launched in 2014 and is strongly associated with Anton Gerashchenko, a former Ukrainian MP and adviser to the Interior Ministry. The database features a number of prominent journalists and other public figures, including citizens of Western nations, as well as many ordinary people.
Trump classified documents case dismissed
RT | July 15, 2024
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of former US President Donald Trump over the alleged mishandling of classified documents has been thrown out, on grounds that Smith’s appointment was not legal.
Smith was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate Trump for supposedly keeping classified documents at his Florida home after leaving the White House, as well as probing an alleged conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.
“None of the statutes cited as legal authority for the appointment gives the attorney general broad inferior-officer appointing power or bestows upon him the right to appoint a federal officer with the kind of prosecutorial power wielded by Special Counsel Smith,” Judge Aileen Cannon wrote.
The “strained statutory arguments, appeals to inconsistent history, or reliance on out-of-circuit authority” by Smith have not persuaded the court otherwise, Cannon added.
The FBI raided Trump’s residence in Mar-a-Lago, Florida in August 2022, confiscating several boxes of documents. According to the Washington Post, some of the materials related to US nuclear secrets, Iran’s missile program, and Washington’s intelligence activities in China.
A federal grand jury in Miami, Florida indicted Trump for mishandling the documents in September 2023. Trump pleaded not guilty and argued that he had done nothing wrong, since he was the ultimate declassification authority.
Court documents unsealed in May this year showed that the Department of Justice had authorized the use of “deadly force when necessary” during the raid.
President Joe Biden also faced an investigation over taking classified documents with him after leaving the White House in 2017. As Barack Obama’s vice president, he did not actually have the authority to possess the files. However, Special Counsel Robert Hur said in February that he would not prosecute the case, as a Washington jury would probably not convict Biden as he seemed like an “elderly man with a poor memory.”
Last month, the US Supreme Court affirmed that presidents had absolute immunity from prosecution for any official actions, that they were still liable for unofficial conduct, but that courts could not speculate about motivation when making that determination.
Smith’s other case against Trump in the Washington, DC federal court remains open for now.
Colombia Professor Faces Firing After Pro-Israel Social Media Pile-On
By John Miles – Sputnik – 14.07.2024
Pro-Israel lawmakers and Zionist accounts on social media caused a firestorm after law professor Katherine Franke questioned the conduct of ex-IDF members on Columbia’s New York City campus.
A tenured professor at New York’s Columbia University faces firing after a pro-Israel online campaign criticizing comments the academic made on behalf of pro-Palestine demonstrators at the Ivy League school.
“There’s a very good chance that they will fire me,” said law professor Katherine Franke after being subjected to questioning she characterized as hostile as a part of Columbia’s investigation into the incident.
The controversy stems from an interview Franke granted to Democracy Now! on January 25. The professor sharply criticized Columbia’s response to an incident in which pro-Palestine protesters were sprayed with an unknown chemical substance by two alleged veterans of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).
University administrators initially blamed the students for conducting an “unsanctioned” protest before finally banning the perpetrators from campus while police conducted an investigation of the incident.
“Columbia has a program, It’s a graduate relationship with older students from other countries, including Israel,” Franke noted on the radio program. “It’s something that many of us were concerned about because so many of those Israeli students who then come to the Columbia campus are coming right out of their military service. And they’ve been known to harass Palestinian and other students on our campus, and it’s something the university has not taken seriously in the past.”
“The university waited three or four days to actually even say anything about it,” she added. “They have not reached out to the students who were sick… some of whom are still in the hospital.”
The comment was subsequently mischaracterized by pro-Israel accounts on social media, who alleged that Franke advocated banning Israeli citizens from the Columbia campus.
“This @Columbia professor has a problem with former IDF soldiers being on campus,” read one post typical of the outrage, shared by Columbia Business School professor Shai Davidai, who identifies on the X platform as “Jewish Israeli” and “Zionist.”
“She doesn’t have a problem with ex-soldiers from any other place,” he complained. “Her only problem is with Israelis. @ProfKFranke – I served in the IDF. Do you think I also shouldn’t be allowed on campus?”
Davidai publicly criticized a wave of pro-Palestine protest on US college campuses earlier this year, calling the students “Nazis” and “terrorists” and calling for the National Guard to be deployed to break up the demonstrations. The demand implies a deadly threat against protesters in the United States, where National Guard troops shot and killed several antiwar demonstrators at Ohio’s Kent State University in 1970.
The business professor’s comments have been shared by official Israeli government accounts online as the country has invested significant effort in defending its cause on social media. It emerged last month that Israel has set up fake accounts online to lobby US lawmakers to continue supporting its military operation in the besieged Gaza Strip, which a study recently claimed could kill as many as 186,000. In 2013 it was revealed the country pays students to defend it on Facebook and Twitter.
Columbia administration released a statement defending Israeli students in response to the firestorm, which was championed by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. The following month Franke was informed a complaint had been lodged against her by two Columbia law professors for “discrimination,” and in April Republican Congresswoman Elise Stefanik called for disciplinary action against her during a House hearing with controversial Columbia University President Minouche Shafik.
A number of college professors and other faculty have been fired or faced disciplinary action in the United States for expressing pro-Palestine sentiments. Dr. Ameer Loggins is filing a defamation suit against California’s Stanford University after being fired for giving a lecture that discussed Israel in the context of historical acts of settler colonialism.
“What’s of greatest concern is not really my 20-year-plus career at Columbia, but what this says about peaceful protest on our campuses around the lives and dignity of Palestinians,” Franke said about the investigation into her comments, which remains ongoing. “What’s happening to me is happening to our students, it’s happened to people on many other campuses.” … Full article
Was Trump ‘Put in a Bullseye’?
Sputnik – 14.07.2024
US presidential candidate Donald Trump was hit in the ear when a gunman opened fire at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13. One spectator was killed and two were critically injured during this apparent attempt on Trump’s life.
“The constant comparisons of [former] President Trump to Hitler and the repeated calls over the last several years for stabbing, killing, poisoning, decapitating or shooting [former] President Trump serve as dog whistles to provoke and incite violence and very well may have fueled this assassination attempt,” GOP House Representative Paul Gosar told Sputnik.
“We do know that in a widely reported call to hundreds of donors last week, Joe Biden boasted, ‘I have one job, and that’s to beat Donald Trump… it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye’,” Gosar recalled.
“Let me be perfectly clear: there is absolutely no place for this sort of incendiary rhetoric and calls for violence in politics today and everyone must condemn it,” the congressman stressed.
Gosar also pointed out that congressional Democrats, led by liberal Representative Bennie Thompson, even introduced legislation that would have stripped Trump of the Secret Service protection afforded to him by his status as a former president.
The multiple reports about Trump’s security detail “asking for beefed up protection and resources for weeks” but getting “rebuffed time and again by Biden’s DHS [Department of Homeland Security],” if true, hint at “criminal” disregard for Trump’s safety, he warned.
Meanwhile, former military intelligence and CIA Operations Officer Philip Giraldi argued that the less-than-stellar performance of US Secret Service agents during the assassination attempt on Donald Trump was somewhat of a surprise.
“For more than twenty years I have observed the work of the Secret Service on protection details close up in embassies and during visits of congressmen and other senior officials, which has been excellent,” Giraldi explains. “So this time I am surprised that they did not have a rooftop 200 meters away from the speaker’s stand with a clear shot at it covered with someone stationed on it to close it off.”
According to him, failure to do so was “either negligence in planning or in execution and someone will likely have to answer some hard questions regarding what was not done.”
Giraldi also notes that he has no information about whether any more shooters were involved in the attempt, and that both of the US political parties “are guilty of incitement because of the violent-laced language they have been using when speaking of their opponents.”
‘Eliminate Him’: A look at the violent rhetoric against Donald Trump
RT | July 14, 2024
While the attempted assassination of Donald Trump has been roundly condemned by his political opponents, liberal politicians and pundits have – implicitly and explicitly – called for his death before.
Trump narrowly avoided death at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on Saturday, when an assassin’s bullet apparently clipped his ear as it whizzed past his head. The shooter – named by the FBI as 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks – killed one spectator at the rally and wounded two others before he was shot dead by Secret Service agents.
US President Joe Biden decried the attempt on Trump’s life, declaring that “there’s no place for this kind of violence in America.” Ever since Trump won the 2016 election, however, he has faced a steady stream of threats from members of Biden’s party and their allies in the media.
Off with his head
Hollywood celebrities reacted with outrage to Trump’s shock defeat of Hillary Clinton in 2016. 80s pop icon Madonna spoke of wanting to “blow up the White House;” actor and activist Peter Fonda called for the president’s youngest son, Barron, to be “put in a cage with pedophiles;” and comedienne Kathy Griffin grabbed headlines when she posed for a photoshoot holding a mockup of Trump’s bloodied and severed head.

Addressing the audience at Britain’s Glastonbury Festival in 2018, Johnny Depp wondered “when was the last time an actor assassinated a president?,” adding “maybe it’s time.” This reference to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln was echoed by Broadway star Carole Cook several months later, when she asked a photographer “where’s John Wilkes Booth when you need him?”
Take him out
Speaking to MSNBC after Trump formally announced his presidential campaign last year, Representative Dan Goldman declared that his fellow New Yorker cannot be allowed to “see public office again.”
“He is not only unfit, he is destructive to our democracy, and he has to be, he has to be eliminated,” Goldman proclaimed.
While Goldman later apologized for his choice of words, he is not the only Democrat lawmaker to apparently threaten Trump’s life. Michigan State Representative Cynthia Johnson was stripped of her committee assignments in 2020 when she warned Trump and his “trumpers” to “walk lightly,” or else her “soldiers” would “make them pay.”
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi used similar rhetoric last week when she declared that the upcoming presidential election “is not a normal election,” and that Trump “must be stopped. He cannot be president.”
Two weeks before the shooting, BBC reporter David Aaronovitch wrote on X that if he were President “Biden, I’d hurry up and have Trump murdered on the basis that he is a threat to America’s security.” On Sunday morning, Aaronovitch said that he had deleted the tweet, claiming that his words were “clearly satirical.”
A threat to democracy
Biden’s response to Saturday’s shooting was one of unequivocal condemnation. The president, who will face off against Trump in this November’s election, said that he was “praying for” his political opponent, and that “we must unite as one nation to condemn” political violence.
In a post on social media less than a month earlier, however, Biden’s team described Trump as “a genuine threat to this nation.”
“He’s a threat to our freedom. He’s a threat to our democracy. He’s literally a threat to everything America stands for,” they posted on the president’s social media accounts.
While Biden has never explicitly wished physical harm on his opponent, at least one would-be assassin has used similar words to justify his plans to kill Trump. 77-year-old Thomas Welnicki was arrested for phoning US Capitol Police in 2020 threatening to “take down” then-President Trump. His lawyer later told prosecutors in New York that Welnicki was distraught at “the threats to our democracy posed by former President Trump.”
Stripped of protection
Had Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson got his way, Trump would have had no Secret Service protection at Saturday’s rally. Earlier this year, Thompson proposed legislation that would strip this protection from former presidents convicted of felonies, as Trump was in May. The act was explicitly tailored to target Trump, Thompson’s office said, explaining that the former president’s criminal charges “have created a new exigency that Congress must address.”
Immediately following Saturday’s shooting, one of Thompson’s staffers wrote on Facebook that the shooter should “get some shooting lessons so you don’t miss next time.” She deleted the post – which Mississippi Republicans called “despicable” – shortly afterwards.
America Was Less Than An Inch Away From Socio-Political Disaster
By Andrew Korybko | July 14, 2024
Former President and impending Republican Nominee Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt at an outdoor rally in Pennsylvania on Saturday days before his party’s national convention after suddenly turning his head at the last second and thus miraculously dodging a bullet that only ended up grazing his ear. The shooter was killed by the Secret Service, but an eyewitness told the media that he warned the police about a man crawling on the roof a few minutes earlier, though no action was taken.
This security lapse is suspicious and prompts speculation that at least one member of the Secret Service might have purposely waited until after the shooter took his shot before neutralizing him, whether out of sympathy for his cause or perhaps because they were in on some sort of plot. About the shooter, he’s been identified as Thomas Matthew Crooks, a registered Republican. It remains unclear at the time of writing what his online history was and whether there’s more to his party affiliation than meets the eye.
At the very least, there’s no doubt that the Democrats’ and their allied “Never Trumpers’” hatemongering played a role in radicalizing the suspect. Had he succeeded in assassinating Trump, then the US would have certainly plunged into socio-political disaster, which it literally missed by less than an inch. Many expect that powerful Democrat donors might soon force Biden to drop out of the race, thus leading to the party selecting their nominee outside of the notionally democratic primary process.
Their Republican counterparts would have done the same on their side of the aisle, especially since Trump hadn’t yet announced his Vice-Presidential pick by the time of his attempted assassination. Both parties would therefore have likely chosen nominees that didn’t complete their respective primary processes, thus blatantly disenfranchising Americans even more than they already are in reality. In theory, the elections could be delayed to re-run the primaries, but Congress might not agree to it.
Even if they did, the aforementioned hyperlinked article reminded readers that the 20th Amendment mandates the end of the President and Vice-President’s four-year terms at noon on 20 January, thus leading to (replacement) President Harris being forced to step down before a new one is elected. Her Vice-Presidential replacement could only be speculated upon in that scenario since the 25th Amendment stipulates that they’d have to be confirmed by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
Whether or not the elections would be delayed, the US would continue to be ruled by the “governing oligarchy” that Axios reported late last month is the real power behind Biden. This analysis here that was coincidentally published earlier that same day noted that “The country is being ruled by a shadowy network of transnational and domestic elites that are united by their radical liberal-globalist ideology.” This group simply exploits Biden as their placeholder to publicly legitimize all of their decisions.
They’d remain in power if the Democrats keep the White House or if a “Republican In Name Only” (RINO) replaced Trump had he been assassinated. The former President promised supporters that he’d make good on his former pledge to “drain the swamp” if he’s re-elected, and while precedent suggests that he might once again fail, there’s still a chance that he might partially succeed. At the very least, his return could create the conditions for some replacements, who might be conservative-nationalists.
This insight sheds light on those forces who’d be pleased had he been assassinated, namely the liberal–globalist clique that secretly controls American policy, and they’d also have been delighted that Trump wouldn’t get the opportunity to end their latest “forever war” in Ukraine like he sought to do. His potential Republican successor could try to follow in his planned footsteps, but they also might not be interested in doing so if they’re a RINO, hence why taking Trump out could have been a game-changer.
On the home front, there’s no doubt that “shitlibs” would have plastered pictures of Trump’s blown-out brains all over social media and their cities in order to incite his supporters to violence, and some of them would have predictably obliged after being endlessly provoked with such images. The ruling liberal-globalists have wanted to radicalize MAGA members for a while already in order to further discredit their movement and create a compelling pretext for cracking down more forcefully upon them all.
It also can’t be ruled out that some of these newly radicalized supporters of his might have carried out “retributive violence” by targeting Democrat officials from the federal level on down to the local one if they blamed them for his assassination. Infamous anti-Trump celebrities and influencers could also have been caught up in this bloody campaign, which might have led to martial law in parts of the country like Trump should have imposed during the Democrats’ spree of urban terrorism in summer 2020.
America’s socio-political fabric could therefore have very easily been torn to shreds had Trump not suddenly turned his head at the last minute and thus miraculously averted this worst-case scenario by less than an inch. There’s no guarantee that this won’t happen again, however, which is why it’s imperative that Trump immediately announce his Vice-Presidential pick and ideally choose someone who the ruling liberal-globalist elite is also afraid of in order to reduce the chances of him being killed.
Regardless of whatever happens, America just got a reality check about how close it is to descending into chaos, which shows how much it’s changed for the worse since 2016. Partisan radicalization and elite scheming have always been around, but they reached an unprecedented level after Trump became the Republican Nominee back then. He’s an imperfect candidate with a lot of personal flaws, but his re-election is the last chance to save America from itself if he succeeds in implementing his lofty plans.
Assassination attempt against Donald Trump shows the U.S. is a failed state
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 14, 2024
Former U.S. President Donald Trump was attacked during a rally in Pennsylvania. A sniper shot at Trump, grazing him in the head and injuring other people attending the event. The American secret service quickly neutralized the shooter after the shots were fired, however witnesses on the streets said they reported to the police about the shooter’s position before the attack, with the agents apparently ignoring the reports.
Trump is fine, the injuries have not caused him any serious damage. More than that, Trump is politically stronger than ever. His image as a “survivor” and “martyr” gives him a great advantage in the electoral race with rival Joe Biden – who has been the target of criticism even by his supporters, due to his serious condition of mental weakness.
Some conspiracy theorists have spread fake news and fantastic narratives on the internet about Trump having orchestrated the attack just to improve his political image. Obviously, this type of speech makes no sense. From a rational point of view, there is no reason for Trump to organize an attempt on his own life just to obtain political gains in a dispute in which he already has every possible advantage. Trump is already recognized as the favorite in the elections, so there is no reason for him to take such a risk.
In the same sense, there is little data available to confirm that Biden and the Democrats are behind the maneuver. The mere fact that there is a political and electoral rivalry is not enough to accuse the side opposing Trump. However, despite this, it is necessary to emphasize that intelligence operations using snipers are a typical CIA tactic. Furthermore, another American security agency with reasons to eliminate Trump is the FBI, as the former president plans to approve a reform that will end part of this institution’s powers.
In the near future, more data will be revealed about the case, which will certainly facilitate the work of investigators and analysts, helping to get to the truth. For now, the main thing to do is not try to reach conclusions about who tried to kill Trump, but to analyze the case as a whole, considering the entire American political and social context in the midst of these elections.
In fact, what can be concluded for now is that the U.S. is already a failed state. The country that was once recognized as the land of democracy and freedom is now nothing more than a state with an unviable administration, full of social chaos, institutional instability, racial tensions and political polarization. The U.S. domestic situation is not so different from that of countries widely recognized as “failed states” in some regions of Africa or Central America. From the moment presidential candidates suffer assassination attempts – or begin to show signs of mental illness – it seems clear that the country is on the brink of an irreversible institutional crisis.
The American reality no longer seems possible to reverse. Intelligence officials have long reported the possibility of the U.S. falling into civil war – or at least serious social conflict – in the coming years. Racial and political tensions have worsened and generated increasing concerns about the near future. Regardless of who wins the elections, this scenario is unlikely to improve. Either president will only worsen the polarization, intensify the hatred of followers of one side against the other. There will be no peace among American citizens, but tensions progressively escalating towards civil war.
If the situation that currently affects the U.S. were occurring in any developing country, Western powers would already be proposing a series of interventionist measures in international organizations. As happens in several poor countries, it is also possible to think of an “international solution” for the U.S., through some intervention by the UN or the OAS. A failed state needs international support to overcome its domestic problems – and, in fact, the U.S. is currently nothing more than a mere failed state.
Perhaps it is time for the U.S. to rethink its own capacity as a sovereign state.
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
Pakistan court acquits Imran Khan, but he remains in jail
Press TV – July 13, 2024
Imran Khan, Pakistan’s former prime minister, will remain in prison even after he and his wife were acquitted on charges of marrying unlawfully by a court in Islamabad.
Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi had been sentenced to seven years for allegedly marrying too soon after her divorce in an alleged breach of Islamic law.
On Saturday, Islamabad Additional District and Sessions Court judge Afzal Majoka announced their appeal was accepted.
The jail sentence, handed to Khan and his wife on February 3, followed two other convictions for him in separate cases. Both have since been overturned. Khan says all cases were filed against him by the military leadership to keep him away from power.
The acquittal in the marriage case seemed to have removed the last hurdle in the way of the former prime minister’s release from prison. But Khan and his wife remain locked up, according to a spokesman for his party — Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).
Spokesman Ahmed Janjua said in a statement that another court in eastern Lahore had approved his arrest over three cases alleging he incited riots in May 2023.
It was “yet another gimmick to keep the illegal imprisonment prolonged,” he said.
Khan was arrested in May 2023 from inside the High Court in Islamabad on corruption charges.
His arrest sparked protests during which supporters of his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party poured onto the streets and clashed with police.
Days before the February elections in the country, the former prime minister was slapped with more convictions, which according to Khan, were orchestrated to prevent his return to power.
Khan served as prime minister from 2018 to 2022, when he was ousted by a no-confidence vote after the military establishment turned against him and backed his political rivals.
A UN panel of experts said earlier this month that Khan’s detention “had no legal basis and appears to have been intended to disqualify him from running for political office.”
“Thus, from the outset, that prosecution was not grounded in law and was reportedly instrumentalized for a political purpose,” said the panel of experts, calling for his immediate release.
Ukrainian children still speaking Russian – regulator
RT | July 12, 2024
Ukrainian children don’t know their official state language well enough because they’re still using Russian in their daily lives, Kiev’s Commissioner for the Protection of the State Language Taras Kremin has complained, urging citizens to report violations of language restrictions.
The commissioner said there are also many violations being recorded in the sphere of education, as well as on the internet and in the service industry. He cited a recent study that suggested one-third of children in some Ukrainian regions prefer to speak Russian.
“A child outside of school uses services, visits shopping and catering establishments, sees external advertising and signboards in non-state language, hears non-state at home,” Kremin wrote on Facebook on Thursday.
He suggested that many schoolchildren were therefore prone to bilingualism and do not have sufficient knowledge of the Ukrainian language.
Kremin said Kiev should strengthen control over compliance with the law on state language, which defines Ukrainian as the only language approved for education, and called on citizens to be more involved in recording and reporting violations of the law.
Since gaining its independence in 1991, Ukraine has largely been a bilingual nation, with most citizens able to speak or understand both Russian and Ukrainian, particularly in the eastern half of the country. After the 2014 US-backed coup in Kiev, however, Ukraine’s new authorities abolished Russian as an official regional language and have adopted policies aimed at suppressing and outlawing it, arguing that it represents a threat to national unity and security.
In 2019, the Ukrainian parliament passed a law requiring Ukrainian to be used exclusively in nearly all aspects of public life, including education, entertainment, politics, business and the service industry, obliging all Ukrainian citizens to know the language. It also requires that 90% of TV and film content produced in the country be made in Ukrainian. From July 17, the use of the Russian language in Ukrainian media will be virtually outlawed, Kremen has said.
This forced Ukrainization was one of the reasons why Russian-speaking residents living in the east of the country rejected the post-coup authorities in Kiev in 2014. Many of these regions, namely the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, have since joined Russia after overwhelmingly voting to do so in public referendums in 2022.
Kremin, however, has denied that the term ‘Russian-speaking’ could be applied to any Ukrainian citizens, stating in an interview last year that the word is a “marker introduced by Russian ideology,” and declaring that “everyone in the country must have command of the Ukrainian language.”
The War on Free Speech: Biden Adds Another Advocate for Censorship to the White House
By Jonathan Turley | July 10, 2024
I have previously written how President Joe Biden is the most anti-free speech president since John Adams. For his part, Biden has continued to double down on his anti-free speech policies with the appointment of figures who have long supported bans and other speech controls. The latest such appointment is Andy Volosky, who was made deputy director of platforms for the White House’s Office of Digital Strategy. Volosky has been outspoken in support of banning former president Donald Trump from social media platforms.
In my new book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage, I lay out the chilling comparisons between the Adams and Biden Administrations in the crackdown of free speech. For Adams, that led to defeat in 1800 when Jefferson ran in part on restoring free speech. To my surprise, Trump and his fellow challengers in this election have not made free speech a central issue to force Biden to defend the massive censorship system supported by his Administration.
The public does not support censorship. This is a movement that originated in higher education and has been pushed by the political and media establishment, not the voters.
Volosky will now help direct digital strategies for the White House. He previously praised the banning of Trump, asking “What took them so long?” in a 2021 blog post.
In Volosky’s blog post, titled “A New, and Hopefully Welcome, Standard,” he warned that “Twitter still allows the accounts of various world leaders, governments, and spokespeople, who use Twitter for what one can only describe as propaganda as cover for autocracy, to continue to use their platform.”
He praised how Democrats have “long advocated for regulating the [social media] platforms” and emphasized how active social media users like himself and others can “keep the platforms honest.”
He added that:
“we can play a role in keeping the platforms honest and improving the positive role of social in people’s lives… It’s past time for the platforms to take content moderation and user safety seriously; as social media professionals, we should be ready and eager to make that happen, and we hope that [banning Trump] can be a small step in getting that ball rolling.”
Again, with the White House doubling down on censorship, Trump and others need to force him to defend his overwhelmingly anti-free speech record. The 2024 election can give voters the same choice that they faced in 1800. Democracy is not on the ballot, but free speech is.
French government fines TV news for allowing a skeptic to speak without being challenged
We know what secrets they fear the most, by how they overreact

By Jo Nova | July 13, 2024
In France, the second largest news network let an economist go on air and declare he thought global warming was a lie and a scam used to justify State intervention. He even went on to say it is a form of totalitarianism. Shockingly (to the regulators Arcom*), the CNEWS TV* hosts did not contest this, and nor did anyone else in the studio. For this, 11 months later, the TV channel is being fined €20,000.
Too close to the truth then?
A popular French rolling news channel has been fined for broadcasting climate scepticism unchallenged
By Saskia O’Donoghue, EuroNews
During the programme, prominent economist Philippe Herlin shared personal climate scepticism – but was not contradicted by anybody else in the TV studio, including the hosts.
“Anthropogenic global warming is a lie, a scam… Explaining to us that it is because of Man, no, that is a conspiracy, and why does that have so much weight?”, Herlin said. “Because it justifies the intervention of the State in our lives, and it absolves the State from having to reduce its public spending… It is a form of totalitarianism.”
Apparently, the real crime here is not that he said the unthinkable, but that the TV crew didn’t correct him:
After investigation, Arcom found that CNews’ lack of reaction was a “failure” to meet the obligations of the channel …
Perhaps if they’d laughed at him, called him petty names, and treated him like a leper it would have been OK? (No, seriously, there is a razor point here. There are bound to be past examples where the only response to a skeptic was to call them a climate denier, and Arcom was apparently happy with that, since they’ve never used this fine before.) Does Arcom approve of namecalling or social approbation as a “balanced response”? Oh. Yes. They. Do.
The regulators go on to explain that the channel:
“… is required to ensure an honest presentation of controversial issues, in particular by ensuring the expression of different points of view”.
Which must be a new requirement since French TV has relentlessly hammered the establishment line in a one sided way for thirty years without needing any balance at all. And Arcom didn’t fine them for shamelessly promoting government propaganda. Perhaps a French skeptic could ask Arcon if controversial government opinions need to be balanced “in an honest presentation” or whether it’s only critics of the government who need to be held to account?
Arcom found that the views shared “contradicted or minimised” the scientific consensus on climate change “through a treatment lacking rigour and without contradiction”.
Since when was it the job of journalists to promote government approved “science”?
The regulator is going out on a limb and sawing off the branch…
Officially, the regulators are trying to pretend they are not punishing the TV channel for putting on a skeptic, which would be a free speech issue, but it’s clearly what they are doing. So they dress this up as a lack of balance, which accidentally exposes that they’ve never cared a jot about balancing opinions before. Immediately, this opens up all kinds of interesting doors: for one, skeptics can start asking where the balance is on controversial government propositions? In most countries about half the population doesn’t agree that mankind is solely responsible for “climate change”. Where is their voice? The government is suggesting that solar panels can stop storms, and EV’s will control floods, why isn’t this a failure of the obligations of a news channel?
Secondly, skeptics can ask when this rule started and why the regulator missed so many past examples. Why aren’t breaches the other way being fined too?
The overreaction IS the news story
Ponder how afraid the believers must be if the mere opinion of an economist is so dangerous. This man is a not a scientist and every person in France has heard the evidence is overwhelming, climate change is real, and 130% of all scientists who ever lived know that CO2 threatens life on Earth. For three decades children have been trained to say that skeptics are funded by Big Oil, and motivated by money, and yet here is one guy who used the word “totalitarian” and they all go off their rocker.
Why, perhaps because it suggests that believers are motivated by a bigger pot of money and power than skeptics ever could be.
* BACKGROUND
Arcon stands for theRegulatory Authority for Audiovisual and Digital Communication
CNews is controlled by billionaire business magnate Vincent Bolloré and has been compared to FOX in the US.
