Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

How many people got banned from their favorite social media for writing about the Hunter laptop and providing their opinion about what the government is doing about COVID?

There is a federal lawsuit, Missouri v. Biden, Per Eric Schmitt, Missouri Attorney General:

Today, the United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana granted Missouri and Louisiana’s motion for discovery in their lawsuit against top-ranking Biden Administration officials for allegedly colluding to suppress freedom of speech, paving the way for the attorneys general to collect discovery and documents from both top-ranking Biden Administration officials as well as social media giants like Twitter, Meta, and others. The lawsuit was filed on May 5.

“In May, Missouri and Louisiana filed a landmark lawsuit against top-ranking Biden Administration officials for allegedly colluding with social media giants to suppress freedom of speech on a number of topics including the origins of COVID-19, the efficacy of masks, and election integrity,” said Attorney General Schmitt. “Today, the Court granted our motion for discovery, paving the way for my Office to gather important documents to get to the bottom of that alleged collusion – this is a huge development.”’


Missouri and Louisiana filed a Motion for Expedited Preliminary Injunction-Related Discovery on June 17, 2022. That motion was granted today by the United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana. The Court’s decision today clears the way for Missouri and Louisiana to gather discovery and documents from Biden Administration officials and social media companies.

While reports of the suit appeared in law journals and law newspapers, there has been little coverage in consumer media until Miranda Devine of the NY Post reported about the suit on October 24th.
Victims of the Biden-Big Tech’s “censorship enterprise” include The Post, whose Hunter Biden laptop exposé was suppressed by Facebook and then Twitter in October 2020 after the FBI went to Facebook warning them with great specificity to watch out for a “dump” of Russian disinformation, pertaining to Joe Biden, with an uncanny resemblance to our stories.
“We allege that top-ranking Biden administration officials colluded with those social media companies to suppress speech about the Hunter Biden laptop story, the origins of COVID-19, the efficacy of masks, and election integrity,” is how the lawsuit was summarized by the intrepid Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, who is leading the action
The specific people named in the suit include “FBI special agents Elvis Chan and Laura Dehmlow, who gave Facebook that detailed “disinformation” briefing right before The Post was censored; White House press secretaries, current and former, Karine Jean-Pierre and Jen Psaki; Dr. Anthony Fauci, the president’s chief medical adviser, and former White House senior COVID-19 adviser Andrew Slavitt; counsel to President Biden Dana Remus; the DHS over the disbanded Disinformation Governance Board; the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency; the FDA; the State Department; and the US Election Assistance Commission”.

Last month the federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Twitter and other social media platforms don’t have an unlimited right to discriminate against “speech they don’t like.”

“The Platforms are not newspapers. Their censorship is not speech,” the court said. “The First Amendment protects speech: it generally prevents the government from interfering with people’s speech.”

Social media considers themselves to be platforms. According to the legal definition, a “social media platform means an application or website through which users can create and share content and find and connect with other users.” The term platform connotes neutrality. It protects the medium from lawsuits based on content. Of course, even platforms should be allowed to censor things like child porn. But media such as Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube practice viewpoint censorship, eliminating the posters or erasing a view they disagree with. That makes them a publisher, not a platform opening themselves to content-based lawsuits.

This is a crucial lawsuit. And needs to be followed closely. When it reaches the Supreme Court, the Biden Administration will be sanctioned for ignoring the First Amendment. Social media will be forced to decide whether they are a platform or a publisher. Once the decision is made, the internet will look very different.


Warner Todd Huston

Warner Todd Huston has been writing editorials and news since 2001 but started his writing career penning articles about U.S. history back in the early 1990s. Huston has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business Network, CNN, and several local Chicago News programs to discuss the issues of the day. Additionally, he is a regular guest on radio programs from coast to coast. Huston has also been a Breitbart News contributor since 2009. Warner works out of the Chicago area, a place he calls a "target rich environment" for political news.


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.


Need help, have a question, or a comment? Send us an email and we'll get back to you as soon as possible.


Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?