Subscribe to Zero-Sum Pfear & Loathing

Public officials and public figures are subject to the higher standard of defamation (New York Times v. Sullivan.) However, it is not clear that it will suffice for a law with potential criminal liability and a law with sweeping limits on political speech.
The GEC memo matters because it shows the State Department’s efforts to tie domestic critics to foreign influence, its extraordinary willingness/eagerness to lie even about basic things, and its desperation to conceal almost everything about its work from voters and Congress alike.
Before breaking down the latest round of “election interference” accusations, let’s look at what Russia’s “sinister” actions amounted to in 2016 and 2020.
So what’s the response when two reputable reporters pull back the curtain on what looks suspiciously like a control mechanism for media narratives? Simple: You accuse them of spreading “misinformation.”
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has long been the smiling face of censorship. As the head of the Labour Party, Blair pushed through some of the early crackdowns on free speech in the United Kingdom.
What are the chances that a President Kamala Harris would resist pressuring social media companies into censorship? Based on her record: Not great.
Misinformation includes what Flaherty calls “deep detection of what is happening on the internet” on election day. The apparent intent is to come across as aggressive, perhaps as an intimidation tactic.
It will be silence on the imperium’s doings between now and Nov 5. And if Harris is elected in November, getting her through the following four years will require an escalated version of the censorship regime the national-security state.