What MSNBC/CNN won’t tell you about the Missouri v Biden victory against CENSORSHIP

Democrats shoot themselves in the foot yet again

This was a truly epic July 4 with the surprise victory for free speech (in the form of an injunction) and an unprecedented 155-page judge’s memorandum laying out all the ways the Biden Administration has likely violated the First Amendment rights of Americans by coercing social media companies to censor sharing of COVID-19 information.

I’ll have much more to say about this, but for now—quickly—I need to convey something that’s important about the ruling for the left.

In the memorandum the judge repeatedly referred to censored COVID-19 information as “conservative speech.” In the margin of my print-out I scribbled “not conservative—politicized.”

This bothered me throughout the entire pandemic. Many of COVID’s most ardent critics are dyed-in-the-wool liberals. Pierre Kory, Robert Malone, Bret Weinstein, and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. are all unquestionably lefties. Malone even maxed out donating to Biden in 2020—although I doubt he’ll make that mistake again. I also know from my own social media following that there is robust support on the left for rational COVID discourse and critique. Many more on the left have held their tongue, and shame on them, but I get it, I guess. It’d be nice to eventually see some courage from these folks. Olly olly oxen free.

The Democratic party politicized everything relating to COVID-19, thereby leaving us stranded and lowering society’s collective IQ by dozens of points, while creating an environment that facilitated too much avoidable sickness, injury and death. This entire circus would be total farce were it not for all the lives lost and diminished by state censorship. Imagine if we had been able to discuss cheap early treatments; or the real safety and efficacy issues with the injectable products.

I complained bitterly to my husband that the politicizing of COVID-19 continues in the pages of the Judge’s memorandum. He said 1) it’s mostly true, and 2) it’s smart legal strategy because in First Amendment law, political speech is the most protected form of speech.

This would explain why the three non-political and well known doctors (Bhattacharya, Kheriaty, Kulldorff) were joined in their complaint by the (politically conservative) Gateway Pundit. They’re making the case for COVID-19 discourse to be framed as political speech.

But there’s more to it than just political speech.

At the beginning of his legal analysis of First Amendment claims (page 88) Judge Doughty cites something called “viewpoint discrimination,” which I believe is the obvious reason for framing censored speech as “conservative.”

Here he says:

“Viewpoint discrimination is an especially egregious form of content discrimination. The government must abstain from regulating speech when the specific motivating ideology or the perspective of the speaker is the rationale for the restriction.”

“If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.”

“What is really telling is that virtually all of the free speech suppressed was ‘conservative’ free speech. Using the 2016 election and the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government apparently engaged in a massive effort to suppress disfavored conservative speech. The targeting of conservative speech indicates that Defendants may have engaged in ‘viewpoint discrimination.’”

One of the reasons the memorandum is so damn long is because the judge explains everything as if speaking to a lay audience. From terms of art to legal principles, the judge speaks to a reader who is assumed not be a lawyer.

So while it is true that censored COVID-19 information wouldn’t be considered “conservative” had it not been for the machinations of the Democrats, we actually live in the world they created. Not every deplatformed social media account was conservative, but in the eyes of the court (and the DNC) any censored COVID-19 information was by definition conservative bullshit.

And now they’re reaping what they sowed.

Biden’s DOJ has already filed to appeal. It’s difficult to imagine any honest court that would rule differently. At best they’re stalling until after next year’s Presidential election—which they’d consider that a win, even if they ultimately lose that appeal—because that’s how far around the bend they’ve gone.