Critics slam timing of Biden's 'ministry of truth' to police internet for 'disinforma

[revelarts]

^Seems they could be in violation of the Hatch Act pretty quickly.


https://osc.gov/Documents/Outreach%2...0Employees.pdf

There's almost no way that they can be in accordance with the law and perform any kind of function in that role.

So folks are boiling the question down too weather or not it's PARTISANSHIP which makes it legal or not for the US government to have a Federal bureau that certifies "truthful" information for the country.

If that's the point that The legality of the office rest on then it's already over.
Why?
Because the Office of Information SAYS it's not Partisan.
Govt lawyers in court defend it.
& Govt prosecutors can't seem to find any partisanship.

It's for the good of the country.

Leaping frogging the Constitution is such a habit now that it's not even on the table as a legal defense for this New layer or unconstitutional BSery.

Political Pragmatism on the right has allowed us to get here.
Along w Assumptions that... "It won't go that far"...
And it's to RADICAL or POPULIST or UNREASONABLE to follow the limits of the Constitution.

Constitutionally There's no place in it for blanket govt Surveillance or a ministry of Misinformation .... Etc etc etc.
But that's fringe thinking.
enjoy your ministry of truth, I'm sure all the so-called conservative Constitution loving Republicans will love it when they are in charge of it.

[icansayit]

THEY IGNORE AND ABUSE THIS...



PERIOD!

[fj1200]

So folks are boiling the question down too weather or not it's PARTISANSHIP which makes it legal or not for the US government to have a Federal bureau that certifies "truthful" information for the country.

If that's the point that The legality of the office rest on then it's already over.
Why?
Because the Office of Information SAYS it's not Partisan.
Govt lawyers in court defend it.
& Govt prosecutors can't seem to find any partisanship.

It's for the good of the country.

Leaping frogging the Constitution is such a habit now that it's not even on the table as a legal defense for this New layer or unconstitutional BSery.

Political Pragmatism on the right has allowed us to get here.
Along w Assumptions that... "It won't go that far"...
And it's to RADICAL or POPULIST or UNREASONABLE to follow the limits of the Constitution.

Constitutionally There's no place in it for blanket govt Surveillance or a ministry of Misinformation .... Etc etc etc.
But that's fringe thinking.
enjoy your ministry of truth, I'm sure all the so-called conservative Constitution loving Republicans will love it when they are in charge of it.

That's a mega post for something that has been around for about a minute and a half and probably hasn't done anything yet. IMO partisanship is exactly what would make it illegal because the Hatch Act says so. There's no right/left in the law as written; it just needs to be enforced. I agree that we don't need any Federal agency for this but as I've said before not every bad idea is unconstitutional. It certainly doesn't help that we have a man-child on the other side of biden with his own unofficial ministry of truth.

And don't throw out 'populist' at me without intention of following up. Following the constitution is not populist.

[Gunny]

That's a mega post for something that has been around for about a minute and a half and probably hasn't done anything yet. IMO partisanship is exactly what would make it illegal because the Hatch Act says so. There's no right/left in the law as written; it just needs to be enforced. I agree that we don't need any Federal agency for this but as I've said before not every bad idea is unconstitutional. It certainly doesn't help that we have a man-child on the other side of biden with his own unofficial ministry of truth.

And don't throw out 'populist' at me without intention of following up. Following the constitution is not populist.

Sorry. Y'all's "real time" isn't checking in with the grandkids before proceeding. I was going to comment on your basic stance yesterday.

I do not disagree that you are legally correct because I lean more toward they'll just do it anyway for the reasons I stated previously. Remember Clinton's "line-item veto" ? It worked for most of his 8 years before it got shot down.

Obamacare. Unconstitutional. Not according to Chief Justice John Roberts. Apparently it says somewhere in the US Constitution we are entitled to healthcare at the working man's expense.

The Iran Nuke deal.

My understanding is Biden is just directing Mayorkas to do this, as he did the previous identifying "extremists" who appear to be only on the right. If that's the case, it isn't going through Congress. I'll give my dissertation on what I think of the way EOs are used (by both sides) at a later time

You are correct that it is illegal. I just disagree that based on legality alone Biden & Co won't do it.

How out of touch to do this right before midterms you are already looking pretty miserable in? It's just so Biden

[fj1200]

You are correct that it is illegal. I just disagree that based on legality alone Biden & Co won't do it.

I'm sure they were set on doing it thinking it's legal not illegal. I hope that they would be shamed into thinking it's a rather stupid thing. If the Republicans are worth any salt, and I think they are, it gets in front of a judge right quick and stopped. And this isn't the type of thing that they can do under the radar; it would be fairly obvious.

[Gunny]

I'm sure they were set on doing it thinking it's legal not illegal. I hope that they would be shamed into thinking it's a rather stupid thing. If the Republicans are worth any salt, and I think they are, it gets in front of a judge right quick and stopped. And this isn't the type of thing that they can do under the radar; it would be fairly obvious.

Oh. I see. You're thinking under the premise the Republican't's will do something

I'm going to try and find an article but this isn't Joe's only overreach on the same day. He's threatening oil companies with fines for not pumping oil because he says so.

I'm not sure any of them have read any law. They're just making this shit up as they go. I certainly hope it reflects in the polls this Fall.

[revelarts]

That's a mega post for something that has been around for about a minute and a half and probably hasn't done anything yet.

Please read my Postscript quote below.

[BoogyMan]

He is dead on correct. I expect so little from either party now that there seems to be very little hope of our founding taking precedent over the machinations of either of the weasel sects.

That's a mega post for something that has been around for about a minute and a half and probably hasn't done anything yet. IMO partisanship is exactly what would make it illegal because the Hatch Act says so. There's no right/left in the law as written; it just needs to be enforced. I agree that we don't need any Federal agency for this but as I've said before not every bad idea is unconstitutional. It certainly doesn't help that we have a man-child on the other side of biden with his own unofficial ministry of truth.

And don't throw out 'populist' at me without intention of following up. Following the constitution is not populist.

[fj1200]

Please read my Postscript quote below.

I don't see a postscript.

He is dead on correct. I expect so little from either party now that there seems to be very little hope of our founding taking precedent over the machinations of either of the weasel sects.

I'm not sure where that makes me incorrect. Where everything is litigated these days I expect that this will not buck that trend.

[Gunny]

He is dead on correct. I expect so little from either party now that there seems to be very little hope of our founding taking precedent over the machinations of either of the weasel sects.

I don't see a postscript.



I'm not sure where that makes me incorrect. Where everything is litigated these days I expect that this will not buck that trend.

I am confused. Which "he" is correct/are you agreeing with @boogeyman?

[Gunny]

Is there supposed to be something humorous about this? This is one of those moments with Dumbass Joe when you just have to wonder WHY? Why make yourself look so transparently as stupid as you are? Not to mention hypocritical. The Biden Admin presuming to tell us what disinformation is reeks of putting Putin in charge of nukes

“You can just call me the Mary Poppins of disinformation.” That Twitter intro to a TikTok parody of the song “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious” is now indelibly connected to Nina Jankowicz, the new head of the federal government’s announced Disinformation Governance Board.
Given her record of ” in our public statements.
It is still unclear from the administration’s public statements what authority the board will wield, but White House press secretary Jen Psaki described the board as intended “to prevent disinformation and misinformation from traveling around the country in a range of communities.”
President Biden already has established himself as arguably the most anti-free speech president since John Adams. During his transition period, Biden appointed outspoken advocates for censorship; as president, he has pushed social media companies to expand censorship, while his administration has been criticized for spying on journalists.

complete article: https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...f-free-speech/

[Gunny]

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...stry-of-truth/

The Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced this week that it has launched what is being dubbed a Disinformation Governance Board, to combat “misinformation.”
No, really.
A government agency creating a “ministry of truth” to combat what it deems misinformation? And it’s going to fall under the leadership of DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas? The guy presiding over the worst border crisis of our lifetimes, who publicly denies it is a crisis at all, while privately admitting it is? Who better to give more
responsibility — in a democracy that largely rejects government intervention over free speech? What could possibly go wrong?
The person chosen to lead this new “Committee of Public Information” under Mayorkas is Nina Jankowicz, who calls herself “a disinformation fellow” and a Russian disinformation expert.
This is always a fun game to play: Let’s say Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) had decided to create a “Disinformation Governance Board” in the state of Florida. And to lead that effort, let’s say he chose someone who once openly pushed a partisan conspiracy theory. You can only imagine the exclamations about a “chilling attack on democracy” and totalitarianism rearing its head in the Sunshine State.
Here’s what Mayorkas’s choice to helm Biden’s “Ministry of Truth” once said about Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop, which many on the left and in the media dubbed as Russian disinformation in the weeks before the 2020 election.


“We should view it as a Trump campaign product,” Jankowicz said of the story at the time. “Not to mention that the emails don’t need to be altered to be part of an influence campaign. Voters deserve that context, not a [fairy] tale about a laptop repair shop,” she also tweeted in October 2020.
Well, it turns out the laptop from hell really is just that for Hunter Biden and possibly his father, the sitting president. The New York Times and Washington Post, which both pushed the same conspiracy theory that the laptop came from Russia to hurt Joe Biden and help Donald Trump, recently confirmed that the laptop and its contents belong to Hunter Biden. A federal investigation into Hunter is expanding, with reports that he may have violated money-laundering, tax and foreign lobbying laws.
The new head of the “Ministry of Truth” isn’t tweeting much about that investigation these days. Why is that?
Jankowicz was also a big fan of the now-discredited (and laughable) Steele dossier. Here’s what she tweeted about a guest appearance that Steele made on something called the Infotagion podcast: “Listened to this last night. Chris Steele (yes THAT Chris Steele) provides some great historical context about the evolution of disinfo. Worth a listen.”
Steele’s sources have since been proven not to be credible. His allegations of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, of Russian hookers and “pee tapes” — also not credible. Yet Jankowicz once recommended that we listen to “THAT Chris Steele” when it comes to disinformation.


And here’s what she tweeted in recent days about Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter: “Last week I told @NPRMICHEL: I shudder to think about if free speech absolutists were taking over more platforms, what that would look like for the marginalized communities … which are already shouldering … disproportionate amounts of this abuse.”
This pro-Steele anti-Musker will report to Mayorkas, who said in congressional testimony this week that he inherited “a broken and dismantled” immigration and border-security system from the Trump administration and that “only Congress can fix this.” He added: “Yet, we have effectively managed an unprecedented number of non-citizens seeking to enter the United States.”
Border crossings have skyrocketed under Biden-Mayorkas, surpassing an estimated 2 million in 2021. The numbers weren’t remotely near those under Trump. It was the Biden administration that stopped border-wall construction and ended an effective “Remain in Mexico” policy for asylum-seekers. It was Biden who as a presidential candidate urged migrants to “surge the border” — and they listened.
The guy whose agency is launching a Disinformation Governance Board also, without evidence, accused his own border patrol agents of whipping migrants, saying that it “painfully conjured up the worst elements of our nation’s ongoing battle against systemic racism.”


You get the point. Mayorkas and Jankowicz are two of the last people who should be leading any “Ministry of Truth.” And the U.S. government shouldn’t even have considered creating something like this to be run by partisans with political agendas.
Yet this horrible idea apparently has been in the works for some time among Democrats.
“There’s absolutely a commission that’s being discussed, but it seems to be more investigating in style rather than truth and reconciliation,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said in an Instagram video in 2018. “I do think that several members of Congress in some of my discussions have brought up media literacy because that is part of what happened here. We’re going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so you can’t just spew disinformation and misinformation.”
“Rein in our media environment” — how comforting, coming from AOC. Here’s what she said in a 2018 “60 Minutes” interview, when asked about how she’d been fact-checked about her dubious public comments:

“People want to really blow up one figure here or one word there. I would argue that they’re missing the forest for the trees. I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually and semantically correct than about being morally right.”
What an utterly fascinating way to define truth: Hey, it’s not that important to be factually correct, as long as a person is, from their own perspective, morally right.
Polling shows both sides of the aisle support reining in Big TechRepublican Party’s priorities and playbook are hidden in plain viewMaybe Mayorkas can add AOC – who really seemed to care about conditions at border facilities until a Democratic president made her suddenly lose her voice – as an honorary spokesperson for the new “Ministry of Truth.”
The Biden administration says it simply wants to battle misinformation. The best way to start might be to purchase a large mirror. When you blame Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine for inflation that has been rising for well over a year, or blame Trump for the current state of the U.S. border, or say democracy is at stake if voting rights aren’t federalized, then the arbiters-of-truth business isn’t one it should be in.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...stry-of-truth/

[Gunny]

https://www.foxnews.com/media/karl-r...political-hack

[fj1200]

I am confused. Which "he" is correct/are you agreeing with @boogeyman?

I think rev was correct which implies that I am not; Just not sure how.

[revelarts]

I don't see a postscript

It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison...