There is no place for a government agency to be telling a private entity what it can and cannot publish in a country that has a functioning First Amendment. From Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., at childrenshealthdefense.org:
The U.S. House Judiciary Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government on Thursday heard testimony from Congress members and ex-FBI agents who criticized government agencies for colluding with media and Big Tech to censor Americans.
The U.S. House Judiciary Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government on Thursday heard testimony from eight witnesses, including Congress members and former FBI agents, during what NPR described as “the Republican majority’s push to ramp up scrutiny of the Biden administration.”
Established last month, the subcommittee — which has subpoena power — is formally tasked with examining how the executive branch investigates and collects information about U.S. citizens, including as part of “ongoing criminal investigations.”
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) chairs the committee. He also chairs the House Judiciary Committee.
According to The Hill, Republicans formed the subcommittee “as a way to counter alleged abuse of a government they say is abusing its power to target conservatives,” while “Democrats see the committee as the weapon itself, a vehicle for the GOP to forward conspiracy theories that will mobilize the Republican base ahead of 2024.”
Two panels of witnesses testified Thursday. The first featured a slate of current and former lawmakers, including Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard.
The second panel included two former FBI agents, Thomas Baker and Nicole Parker, Jonathan Turley, J.D., a professor at the George Washington University Law Center and Elliott Williams, principal of The Raben Group, a prominent lobbying firm.
Why it’s almost as if Twit was chock full o’ replacements!
Well! Is anybody going to get their pee pee slapped for such an egregious overreach? Why no, of course not. What do you take us for?