mintpressnews--2020-11-02--No, You Don’t Have To Vote for Trump or Biden. Here Are a Few Third-Party Candidates and How They’ve

No, You Don’t Have To Vote for Trump or Biden. Here Are a Few Third-Party Candidates and How They’ve Been Censored

With just hours to go before polls open and with 92 million Americans already having cast their vote , this year ’ s election will decide who will assume the office of the most powerful person in the world : Joe Biden or Donald Trump .
Yet individuals ’ votes do not have to come down to that .
The United States is an outlier among Western nations in the dominance of its two-party system , something barely plausible in many democracies .
Unbeknownst to many , however , there are a number of other candidates on the presidential ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the established duopoly .
The two-party system is clearly failing Americans , with both candidates for the United States ’ top job largely disliked by the public .
The latest survey from the Pew Research Center finds that Biden only has a 46 % favorability rating , with Trump trailing at 42 % .
This is , in fact , an improvement from 2016 , which pitted the two least popular major candidates of all time against each other in a historic race which left Americans far from enthusiastic about their electoral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claim they are voting for Biden , with two-thirds telling pollsters that they feel compelled to vote against Trump .
Meanwhile , around a quarter of Republicans are doing the same , voting not for Trump , but against Biden and his agenda .
And while Trump and Biden spend fortunes attacking each other in the media , it is often difficult to establish meaningful differences between their platforms on a number of issues .
Today , the president again accused the 77-year-old Delaware native of supporting a ban on fracking , something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ despite pressure from his base to do so .
A number of polls have shown that the public clearly supports a complete ban on the practice .
Likewise , on foreign policy , healthcare , and defense , the two parties display many more similarities than differences .
Luckily , there are other options .
The Green Party is hoping to build on winning 1.5 million votes in 2016 .
Their presidential ticket consists of Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker as his running mate .
A self-described democratic socialist , Hawkins worked in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war and environmental destruction for almost 50 years .
The Green platform calls for the move to a “ socialist economy , ” including the public ownership of big banks and other large industries such as transport , energy , and manufacturing , a great expansion of worker cooperatives , and democratic economic planning .
On foreign policy , Hawkins is running on the promise to cut the military budget by 75 % and use the savings to fund a worldwide shift to renewable energy , unilateral disarmament and to never use nuclear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a democratization of the media system , including antitrust regulations to break up powerful monopolies .
Founded in 1971 , the Libertarian Party achieved by far their greatest vote total in the 2016 presidential election , where former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson received 4.5 million votes nationwide .
This year , Jo Jorgensen , a former IBM representative , and a software business owner is hoping to go further .
Jorgensen ’ s platform opposes COVID-19 lockdowns and calls for cuts to public spending and allowing businesses , big and small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ As president , I will work tirelessly to slash federal spending , make government much , much smaller , and eliminate the federal income tax , so you can keep what you earn , ” she promises on her campaign ’ s website .
She also proposes a huge shift towards nuclear power , while opposing Medicare-For-All , preferring free-market solutions to the healthcare crisis .
“ Government anti-poverty programs don ’ t work , ” she states .
A lifelong activist based in San Francisco , Gloria La Riva is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s presidential candidate in 2020 .
La Riva is calling for a complete rethink of how society is structured , arguing that all essentials for human survival , including food , water , housing , education , healthcare , and jobs should be considered guaranteed human rights for all rather than distributed on a for-profit basis .
“ For the Earth to live , capitalism must be replaced with a socialist system , ” she claims , noting that incessant growth and overproduction is threatening the future of the planet .
La Riva @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military bases , taking over giant Wall Street banks , and jailing those responsible for the financial crisis .
There are also a number of other candidates on the ballot in many states , including Rocky De La Fuente of the Alliance Party , Don Blankenship of the Constitution Party , Brian Carrol of the American Solidarity Party , Jade Simmons from Becoming One Nation , and independent Brock Pierce .
Rapper Kanye West ’ s name will also appear on ballots in 12 states .
However , simply appearing on the ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hurdle for many , with only Jorgensen ’ s Libertarian Party even able to qualify in all 50 states .
Much of the attack on third parties is being led by Democrats , who wish to keep them off the ballot to stop any spoiler effect they could have .
Earlier this year , Green Party vice-president Walker was alleged to have filled out a change of address form slightly incorrectly for her South Carolina residence .
As a result , Democrats used this to lead a campaign to remove her name from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania and Wisconsin .
Third parties have also been undermined by a lack of media publicity , their actions barely reported on .
As such , they have been forced to rely on social media for outreach .
However , that has not been plain sailing .
Hawkins was even ( temporarily ) kicked off Twitter for alleged impersonation .
“ How do I impersonate myself ?
Twitter ’ s explanation for its censorship makes no sense , ” he responded .
Of course , barring an act of God or a disaster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next president , meaning that the principal choice is between these two men .
Does it , therefore , follow that voting third party is a wasted vote ?
Certainly , there are differences between the two main candidates , particularly on climate change , that could have profound effects on both the United States and the world going forward .
While Trump charges forward , claiming that global warming is a Chinese “ hoax , ” Biden at least acknowledges there is an existential problem that must be met , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ radical platform on the issue .
This alone , for many , is enough to pick Biden .
“ A vote for the Green Party is a vote for fascism , ” claim some Democrats , arguing that by picking a third party , they are enabling Trump .
However , the reality of the democratic system is that most people ’ s presidential votes count for very little .
Politico calculated that the election will be decided by voters in just eight battleground states : Arizona , Florida , Georgia , Michigan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Wisconsin .
Because of the electoral college system , most Americans live in states where the outcome has been largely predetermined .
Others see the choice as a philosophical one , preferring to vote for something they want and lose than for something they don ’ t want and win .
“ The two-party system only provides an illusion of choice .
The Democratic Party and Republican Party are two variations of a single , war-driven , Wall Street-funded political party , ” wrote MintPress ’ Mnar Muhawesh in 2016 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for president .
Stein herself also noted that constantly picking the lesser of two evils gets you nowhere .
“ The lesser evil paves the way to the greater evil .
It ’ s not in opposition to it .
It makes way for it , ” she said , “ I feel most horrible about a voting system that says : Here are two deadly choices , now pick your weapon of self-destruction.
” Proponents of third parties argue that it keeps the two major parties in check and scared voters could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of powerful third parties has shaken up the political system and led to progressive change .
Abraham Lincoln and the Republicans , after all , were a third party campaigning against the institution of slavery .
Since at least 2008 , when Barack Obama campaigned on it , Americans have been crying out for hope and change , but have received very little of it .
Others claim that they artificially swing the election towards one candidate .
The Green ’ s Ralph Nader is often accused of handing the 2000 election to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ votes undermining Al Gore ’ s shot at the White House ( this theory is hotly disputed ) .
Eight years before that , billionaire Ross Perot received 19 % of the total vote .
However , the bigger threat to election integrity this year is surely voter suppression shenanigans .
Earlier this year , Trump let slip that he believed no Republican would ever be elected if turnout was high .
Since then , he appears to have been on a campaign to decrease participation .
Hundreds of mail sorting machines have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ houses .
Since 2013 , almost 1,700 polling stations across the South have also been closed down , primarily in poorer , darker neighborhoods .
As a result , millions will have to stand in line for hours in the middle of a pandemic .
Trump and the Republicans have also attacked the process of postal voting and ballot collection , with the president encouraging his supporters to “ protect ” polling stations .
As a result , only two-thirds of Americans are confident that Election Day will proceed democratically .
Across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for violence .
In New York City , hotels and stores are boarding up their windows , as if they expect a riot .
Meanwhile , officials have ordered the immediate construction of a non-scaleable fence around the White House .
Regardless of whether you will opt for one of the major parties or choose an alternative one , there will likely be a good number of down ballot races and initiatives that will be worth deciding between .
The great anarchist activist Emma Goldman is thought to have said that if voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it illegal .
The lengths the establishment goes to dissuade the public from doing so suggest that it does indeed still matter .
Feature photo | Green Party Candidate Howie Hawkins is pictured speaking to voters .
Photo | Hawkins Campaign Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age : Still Manufacturing Consent .
He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

With just hours to go before polls open and with 92 million Americans already having cast their vote, this year’s election will decide who will assume the office of the most powerful person in the world: Joe Biden or Donald Trump. Yet individuals’ votes do not have to come down to that. The United States is an outlier among Western nations in the dominance of its two-party system, something barely plausible in many democracies. Unbeknownst to many, however, there are a number of other candidates on the presidential ballot offering a distinctly different future for America than the established duopoly.
The two-party system is clearly failing Americans, with both candidates for the United States’ top job largely disliked by the public. The latest survey from the Pew Research Center finds that Biden only has a 46% favorability rating, with Trump trailing at 42%. This is, in fact, an improvement from 2016, which pitted the two least popular major candidates of all time against each other in a historic race which left Americans far from enthusiastic about their electoral process. Only one-third of Democrat voters claim they are voting for Biden, with two-thirds telling pollsters that they feel compelled to vote against Trump. Meanwhile, around a quarter of Republicans are doing the same, voting not for Trump, but against Biden and his agenda.
And while Trump and Biden spend fortunes attacking each other in the media, it is often difficult to establish meaningful differences between their platforms on a number of issues. Today, the president again accused the 77-year-old Delaware native of supporting a ban on fracking, something Biden has vehemently and repeatedly denied, despite pressure from his base to do so. A number of polls have shown that the public clearly supports a complete ban on the practice. Likewise, on foreign policy, healthcare, and defense, the two parties display many more similarities than differences. Luckily, there are other options.
The Green Party
The Green Party is hoping to build on winning 1.5 million votes in 2016. Their presidential ticket consists of Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker as his running mate. A self-described democratic socialist, Hawkins worked in clean energy and has been organizing against war and environmental destruction for almost 50 years. The Green platform calls for the move to a “socialist economy,” including the public ownership of big banks and other large industries such as transport, energy, and manufacturing, a great expansion of worker cooperatives, and democratic economic planning.
On foreign policy, Hawkins is running on the promise to cut the military budget by 75% and use the savings to fund a worldwide shift to renewable energy, unilateral disarmament and to never use nuclear weapons aggressively. The Greens also call for a democratization of the media system, including antitrust regulations to break up powerful monopolies.
The Libertarian Party
Founded in 1971, the Libertarian Party achieved by far their greatest vote total in the 2016 presidential election, where former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson received 4.5 million votes nationwide. This year, Jo Jorgensen, a former IBM representative, and a software business owner is hoping to go further.
Jorgensen’s platform opposes COVID-19 lockdowns and calls for cuts to public spending and allowing businesses, big and small, to operate with even more freedom. “As president, I will work tirelessly to slash federal spending, make government much, much smaller, and eliminate the federal income tax, so you can keep what you earn,” she promises on her campaign’s website.
She also proposes a huge shift towards nuclear power, while opposing Medicare-For-All, preferring free-market solutions to the healthcare crisis. “Government anti-poverty programs don’t work,” she states.
Party for Socialism and Liberation
A lifelong activist based in San Francisco, Gloria La Riva is the Party for Socialism and Liberation’s presidential candidate in 2020. La Riva is calling for a complete rethink of how society is structured, arguing that all essentials for human survival, including food, water, housing, education, healthcare, and jobs should be considered guaranteed human rights for all rather than distributed on a for-profit basis.
“For the Earth to live, capitalism must be replaced with a socialist system,” she claims, noting that incessant growth and overproduction is threatening the future of the planet. La Riva is also advocating closing all foreign U.S. military bases, taking over giant Wall Street banks, and jailing those responsible for the financial crisis.
There are also a number of other candidates on the ballot in many states, including Rocky De La Fuente of the Alliance Party, Don Blankenship of the Constitution Party, Brian Carrol of the American Solidarity Party, Jade Simmons from Becoming One Nation, and independent Brock Pierce. Rapper Kanye West’s name will also appear on ballots in 12 states.
Establishment hostility
However, simply appearing on the ballot has proven to be an extremely difficult hurdle for many, with only Jorgensen’s Libertarian Party even able to qualify in all 50 states. Much of the attack on third parties is being led by Democrats, who wish to keep them off the ballot to stop any spoiler effect they could have.
Earlier this year, Green Party vice-president Walker was alleged to have filled out a change of address form slightly incorrectly for her South Carolina residence. As a result, Democrats used this to lead a campaign to remove her name from ballot papers in the battleground states of Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Third parties have also been undermined by a lack of media publicity, their actions barely reported on. As such, they have been forced to rely on social media for outreach. However, that has not been plain sailing. Hawkins was even (temporarily) kicked off Twitter for alleged impersonation. “How do I impersonate myself? Twitter’s explanation for its censorship makes no sense,” he responded.
Pros and cons of third-party voting
Of course, barring an act of God or a disaster, either Trump or Biden will become the next president, meaning that the principal choice is between these two men. Does it, therefore, follow that voting third party is a wasted vote?
Certainly, there are differences between the two main candidates, particularly on climate change, that could have profound effects on both the United States and the world going forward. While Trump charges forward, claiming that global warming is a Chinese “hoax,” Biden at least acknowledges there is an existential problem that must be met, and has been forced into adopting a more radical platform on the issue. This alone, for many, is enough to pick Biden.
“A vote for the Green Party is a vote for fascism,” claim some Democrats, arguing that by picking a third party, they are enabling Trump.
However, the reality of the democratic system is that most people’s presidential votes count for very little. Politico calculated that the election will be decided by voters in just eight battleground states: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Because of the electoral college system, most Americans live in states where the outcome has been largely predetermined.
Others see the choice as a philosophical one, preferring to vote for something they want and lose than for something they don’t want and win. “The two-party system only provides an illusion of choice. The Democratic Party and Republican Party are two variations of a single, war-driven, Wall Street-funded political party,” wrote MintPress’ Mnar Muhawesh in 2016, endorsing Jill Stein of the Green Party for president. Stein herself also noted that constantly picking the lesser of two evils gets you nowhere. “The lesser evil paves the way to the greater evil. It’s not in opposition to it. It makes way for it,” she said, “I feel most horrible about a voting system that says: Here are two deadly choices, now pick your weapon of self-destruction.”
Proponents of third parties argue that it keeps the two major parties in check and scared voters could desert them. Historically, the arrival of powerful third parties has shaken up the political system and led to progressive change. Abraham Lincoln and the Republicans, after all, were a third party campaigning against the institution of slavery. Since at least 2008, when Barack Obama campaigned on it, Americans have been crying out for hope and change, but have received very little of it.
Others claim that they artificially swing the election towards one candidate. The Green’s Ralph Nader is often accused of handing the 2000 election to George W. Bush, his 2.9 million votes undermining Al Gore’s shot at the White House (this theory is hotly disputed). Eight years before that, billionaire Ross Perot received 19% of the total vote.
Undermining election integrity
However, the bigger threat to election integrity this year is surely voter suppression shenanigans. Earlier this year, Trump let slip that he believed no Republican would ever be elected if turnout was high. Since then, he appears to have been on a campaign to decrease participation.
Hundreds of mail sorting machines have been removed from post offices and sorting houses. Since 2013, almost 1,700 polling stations across the South have also been closed down, primarily in poorer, darker neighborhoods. As a result, millions will have to stand in line for hours in the middle of a pandemic. Trump and the Republicans have also attacked the process of postal voting and ballot collection, with the president encouraging his supporters to “protect” polling stations. As a result, only two-thirds of Americans are confident that Election Day will proceed democratically.
Across the country, organizations and businesses are preparing for violence. In New York City, hotels and stores are boarding up their windows, as if they expect a riot. Meanwhile, officials have ordered the immediate construction of a non-scaleable fence around the White House.
Regardless of whether you will opt for one of the major parties or choose an alternative one, there will likely be a good number of down ballot races and initiatives that will be worth deciding between. The great anarchist activist Emma Goldman is thought to have said that if voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal. The lengths the establishment goes to dissuade the public from doing so suggest that it does indeed still matter.
Feature photo | Green Party Candidate Howie Hawkins is pictured speaking to voters. Photo | Hawkins Campaign
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.


mintpressnews--2020-11-02--Meet the Obama-Era Neoliberals Advising State Governments on Election Day Security

For months , officials across the country have been war-gaming the 2020 election through so-called ‘ tabletop exercises ’ that projected various outcomes for the electoral contest now less than 24 hours away .
Organized by DHS and others since February , one of these scenarios is likely to play out tomorrow , and one group , in particular , is making sure that state and local authorities have all the legal resources they need to face what promises to be a pivotal – and perhaps , historically violent – U.S. presidential election .
Across the nation , businesses are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that spread throughout the country during the George Floyd protests .
Lumber and hardware stores in major cities are seeing a considerable spike in business as other retail establishments board up their storefronts .
In Seattle , demand for plywood has skyrocketed in just the past two weeks .
Nearby Portland , Oregon , where nightly protests have continued uninterrupted since May , is also gearing up for intensified civil unrest .
The preparations at the state level go far beyond concern over a few broken windows , however .
A neoliberal think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national security officials , called the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection ( ICAP ) at Georgetown Law Center , has been advising government officials via states ’ District Attorney Offices ( DAO ) throughout the nation since the summer .
ICAP has been churning out “ critical resources to help local governments and community members across the country protect public safety ” in partnership with the Anti-defamation League ( ADL ) and a “ coalition of the nation ’ s leading law firms ” , which have been working pro-bono to offer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and creative solutions for local jurisdictions ” to confront “ political violence ” according to a July press release .
The outfit ’ s legal director , Mary McCord , spurred the creation of a special task force to fight “ voter suppression ” in Philadelphia , to “ work alongside the City Commissioners and our partners in law enforcement , government , and community to ensure that no Philadelphian is intimidated , misled , threatened , or harmed as they cast their ballot , ” as Philly DA Larry Krasner revealed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see its fair share of civil unrest , given the critical role it played in the 2016 election and other notable factors , such as the Transition Integrity Project ( TIP ) , recently covered by Whitney Webb and Ryan Christian .
But , according to McCord , other parts of the country – particularly the northwest – could be primed for more serious problems .
“ There ’ s a great potential for civil unrest in Washington [ state ] , ” due to the large number of paramilitary units in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in a recent article about the prospect of Gov .
Inslee deploying National Guard troops at the polls .
She warned of groups like People ’ s Rights , which was founded by anti-government activist Ammon Bundy , who captured the national spotlight in 2016 when he led the occupation of the federal Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon .
The organization boasts over 26,000 members in 15 states but counts Washington as its largest stronghold .
Washington – along with Oregon and Pennsylvania – is among five states identified as “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around election time in an ostensibly independent report published two weeks ago by a U.S. non-profit called the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project ( ACLED ) , which like ICAP ’ s nationwide campaign , launched its “ US Crisis Monitor ” project to “ provide real-time data on political violence and demonstrations in America ” last July .
As these various election security projects were getting underway , the George Floyd protests in Seattle were culminating with the arrest of 30 people during the violent take-down of the so-called “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the largest instances of civil disobedience outside of Minneapolis-Saint Paul .
Seattle ’ s Democratic mayor , Jenny Durkan , politicized tensions when she sided with the protestors ’ call to penalize the police department in what remains a tug of war between city officials over her proposed budget cuts and police downsizing , many of which were vetoed by the City Council in September after negotiations between the mayor , Seattle Police Department ( SPD ) and council members broke down .
On Friday , they unveiled a new plan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 17 % as police officers leave the department in droves .
While Durkan continues to rake political mileage from the ongoing issue by refusing to appoint a new police chief after former Seattle police chief Carmen Best resigned in August , the rest of Washington is in a similar state of uneasiness , due in part to the disastrous intervention by DHS and fallout in nearby Portland , Oregon , as well as that state ’ s notorious links to white nationalist ideologues and armed militias .
Washington Governor Jay Inslee declined to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is training to join hundreds of previously trained Guard members , will be deployed on election day .
U.S. Attorney Brian Moran of the Western District of Washington , nevertheless confirmed that “ robust preparations ” have been made to protect “ the bedrock of our democracy ” come November 3rd and beyond .
The state of Washington is getting their ducks in a row for what many see as a referendum on the country ’ s ideological direction .
A common theme of any election campaign , to be sure , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ danger at this particularly volatile moment in history where deep political divisions are intersecting with a pandemic crisis , that has – in turn – brought on a frightening display of government power and top-down control over practically every aspect of normal life .
Preparations at the state and municipal level in Washington beyond have been significantly aided by ICAP , which has been pumping out copious amounts of materials – information packets , publications , and reports – to “ help prevent unlawful paramilitary conduct and voter intimidation ” on the eve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ features nine bullet points , which describe what officials should be looking out for when identifying “ voter intimidation.
” The document also cites multiple instances of case law and sections of the U.S. code that apply to questions like free speech and its limits .
In September , the Center put out fact sheets on “ unlawful militias ” across the country to help all 50 states “ prepare for possible unlawful militia ” actions at the polls .
McCord ’ s opinion about what the 2020 elections could bring might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not for her central role in the historic 2016 election and its aftermath .
McCord was the Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Justice Department between October 2016 – installed by Obama only days before Trump ’ s victory – until April 2017 , when she left in the midst of one of the administration ’ s early purges , which had not yet filled the vacancies at the DoJ .
It was none other than McCord who led the DoJ ’ s investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspected ties to Russian oligarchs .
She was also a key player in the FBI ’ s initial investigation into the Trump campaign , code-named “ Crossfire Hurricane , ” and was one of the high-level Justice officials who reviewed the controversial FISA warrant renewals against Carter Page ; two of which were deemed invalid by Bill Barr ’ s Justice Department in January .
ICAP ’ s board is chaired by an asset manager from a notorious private equity firm with ties to a coronavirus surveillance system backed by Jared Kushner , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John Ashcroft ’ s lead defense attorney , Neal Katyal , who successfully challenged a lower court ruling in the Supreme Court on behalf of the former Attorney General , shelving a law that would have allowed civil suits against Bush ’ s former AG for abuses on “ war on terror.
” Other faculty members , along with McCord and Katyal , include Executive Director Joshua Geltzer , former Senior Director for Counterterrorism at the National Security Council and member of the Council on Foreign Relations .
From 2013 to 2015 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Assistant Attorney General for National Security Division at the Justice Department , John P. Carlin , who in his capacity at the DoJ ’ s NSD , is suspected of covering up FISA abuses that were knowingly under review by the Inspector General at the time in order to move the Carter Page warrant forward .
After he quietly resigned days after submitting his fraudulent annual certifications under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act , Mary McCord would replace John Carlin .
Rounding out the election operatives on ICAP ’ s board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Forces serviceman and Tel-Aviv University graduate named Arik Ben-Zvi , who was also chief communications consultant on national and local elections in Israel , Bulgaria , and the British Virgin Islands .
Ben-Zvi is also co-founder of the Glover Park Group lobbying firm , which was hired by Egypt ’ s military coup regime in 2013 to do its bidding in Washington D.C. Ben-Zvi currently runs Breakwater Strategy , which is described on its own website as “ a strategic communications and insights consultancy focused on navigating change , crisis , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” By and large , however , it is through Mary McCord that ICAP channels its drive and purpose .
In April , she published an op-ed in the Washington Post condemning Trump ’ s alleged incitement to violence via social media and declared , outright , that the president ’ s tweets should not be considered “ protected free speech.
” McCord goes even further and suggests that the presidential tweets might even constitute a crime under federal law .
Despite vacillating over the answer to that question , McCord seems relentless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that will not only justify the abrogation of freedom of speech but of public assembly and other constitutional rights .
Feature photo | The White House is visible behind a large security fence as uniformed Secret Service and FBI agents stand on the street in front of Lafayette Park in the morning hours in Washington .
Federal and state law enforcement officials have begun expanded preparations for the possibility of widespread unrest at the polls on Election Day .
Andrew Harnik | AP

For months, officials across the country have been war-gaming the 2020 election through so-called ‘tabletop exercises’ that projected various outcomes for the electoral contest now less than 24 hours away. Organized by DHS and others since February, one of these scenarios is likely to play out tomorrow, and one group, in particular, is making sure that state and local authorities have all the legal resources they need to face what promises to be a pivotal – and perhaps, historically violent – U.S. presidential election.
Across the nation, businesses are preparing for a repeat of the mayhem that spread throughout the country during the George Floyd protests. Lumber and hardware stores in major cities are seeing a considerable spike in business as other retail establishments board up their storefronts.
In Seattle, demand for plywood has skyrocketed in just the past two weeks. Nearby Portland, Oregon, where nightly protests have continued uninterrupted since May, is also gearing up for intensified civil unrest. The preparations at the state level go far beyond concern over a few broken windows, however.
A neoliberal think tank filled to the brim with Obama-era national security officials, called the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP) at Georgetown Law Center, has been advising government officials via states’ District Attorney Offices (DAO) throughout the nation since the summer. ICAP has been churning out “critical resources to help local governments and community members across the country protect public safety” in partnership with the Anti-defamation League (ADL) and a “coalition of the nation’s leading law firms”, which have been working pro-bono to offer “legal principles, best practices, and creative solutions for local jurisdictions” to confront “political violence” according to a July press release.
The outfit’s legal director, Mary McCord, spurred the creation of a special task force to fight “voter suppression” in Philadelphia, to “work alongside the City Commissioners and our partners in law enforcement, government, and community to ensure that no Philadelphian is intimidated, misled, threatened, or harmed as they cast their ballot,” as Philly DA Larry Krasner revealed in early October.
Pennsylvania is likely to see its fair share of civil unrest, given the critical role it played in the 2016 election and other notable factors, such as the Transition Integrity Project (TIP), recently covered by Whitney Webb and Ryan Christian. But, according to McCord, other parts of the country – particularly the northwest – could be primed for more serious problems. “There’s a great potential for civil unrest in Washington [state],” due to the large number of paramilitary units in the region, McCord told In Homeland Security, in a recent article about the prospect of Gov. Inslee deploying National Guard troops at the polls.
She warned of groups like People’s Rights, which was founded by anti-government activist Ammon Bundy, who captured the national spotlight in 2016 when he led the occupation of the federal Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon. The organization boasts over 26,000 members in 15 states but counts Washington as its largest stronghold.
Hair-trigger
Washington – along with Oregon and Pennsylvania – is among five states identified as “at risk” of increased militia activity around election time in an ostensibly independent report published two weeks ago by a U.S. non-profit called the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED), which like ICAP’s nationwide campaign, launched its “US Crisis Monitor” project to “provide real-time data on political violence and demonstrations in America” last July.
As these various election security projects were getting underway, the George Floyd protests in Seattle were culminating with the arrest of 30 people during the violent take-down of the so-called “autonomous zone,” in what was one of the largest instances of civil disobedience outside of Minneapolis-Saint Paul.
Seattle’s Democratic mayor, Jenny Durkan, politicized tensions when she sided with the protestors’ call to penalize the police department in what remains a tug of war between city officials over her proposed budget cuts and police downsizing, many of which were vetoed by the City Council in September after negotiations between the mayor, Seattle Police Department (SPD) and council members broke down. On Friday, they unveiled a new plan to cut funding to the SPD by 17% as police officers leave the department in droves.
While Durkan continues to rake political mileage from the ongoing issue by refusing to appoint a new police chief after former Seattle police chief Carmen Best resigned in August, the rest of Washington is in a similar state of uneasiness, due in part to the disastrous intervention by DHS and fallout in nearby Portland, Oregon, as well as that state’s notorious links to white nationalist ideologues and armed militias.
Washington Governor Jay Inslee declined to state whether the 300 National Guard soldiers it is training to join hundreds of previously trained Guard members, will be deployed on election day. U.S. Attorney Brian Moran of the Western District of Washington, nevertheless confirmed that “robust preparations” have been made to protect “the bedrock of our democracy” come November 3rd and beyond.
Bad advice
The state of Washington is getting their ducks in a row for what many see as a referendum on the country’s ideological direction. A common theme of any election campaign, to be sure, but one which seems especially fraught with danger at this particularly volatile moment in history where deep political divisions are intersecting with a pandemic crisis, that has – in turn – brought on a frightening display of government power and top-down control over practically every aspect of normal life.
Preparations at the state and municipal level in Washington beyond have been significantly aided by ICAP, which has been pumping out copious amounts of materials – information packets, publications, and reports – to “help prevent unlawful paramilitary conduct and voter intimidation” on the eve of the election.
One such publication features nine bullet points, which describe what officials should be looking out for when identifying “voter intimidation.” The document also cites multiple instances of case law and sections of the U.S. code that apply to questions like free speech and its limits. In September, the Center put out fact sheets on “unlawful militias” across the country to help all 50 states “prepare for possible unlawful militia” actions at the polls.
NatSec sabotage hawks
McCord’s opinion about what the 2020 elections could bring might be taken with a grain of salt if not for her central role in the historic 2016 election and its aftermath. McCord was the Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Justice Department between October 2016 – installed by Obama only days before Trump’s victory – until April 2017, when she left in the midst of one of the administration’s early purges, which had not yet filled the vacancies at the DoJ.
It was none other than McCord who led the DoJ’s investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the election and the Trump campaign’s suspected ties to Russian oligarchs. She was also a key player in the FBI’s initial investigation into the Trump campaign, code-named “Crossfire Hurricane,” and was one of the high-level Justice officials who reviewed the controversial FISA warrant renewals against Carter Page; two of which were deemed invalid by Bill Barr’s Justice Department in January.
ICAP’s board is chaired by an asset manager from a notorious private equity firm with ties to a coronavirus surveillance system backed by Jared Kushner, and led on the faculty side by John Ashcroft’s lead defense attorney, Neal Katyal, who successfully challenged a lower court ruling in the Supreme Court on behalf of the former Attorney General, shelving a law that would have allowed civil suits against Bush’s former AG for abuses on “war on terror.”
Other faculty members, along with McCord and Katyal, include Executive Director Joshua Geltzer, former Senior Director for Counterterrorism at the National Security Council and member of the Council on Foreign Relations. From 2013 to 2015, Geltzer served as Counsel to the then Assistant Attorney General for National Security Division at the Justice Department, John P. Carlin, who in his capacity at the DoJ’s NSD, is suspected of covering up FISA abuses that were knowingly under review by the Inspector General at the time in order to move the Carter Page warrant forward. After he quietly resigned days after submitting his fraudulent annual certifications under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, Mary McCord would replace John Carlin.
Rounding out the election operatives on ICAP’s board of directors is a former Israeli Defense Forces serviceman and Tel-Aviv University graduate named Arik Ben-Zvi, who was also chief communications consultant on national and local elections in Israel, Bulgaria, and the British Virgin Islands. Ben-Zvi is also co-founder of the Glover Park Group lobbying firm, which was hired by Egypt’s military coup regime in 2013 to do its bidding in Washington D.C. Ben-Zvi currently runs Breakwater Strategy, which is described on its own website as “a strategic communications and insights consultancy focused on navigating change, crisis, and the complex moments that make or break reputations.”
By and large, however, it is through Mary McCord that ICAP channels its drive and purpose. In April, she published an op-ed in the Washington Post condemning Trump’s alleged incitement to violence via social media and declared, outright, that the president’s tweets should not be considered “protected free speech.” McCord goes even further and suggests that the presidential tweets might even constitute a crime under federal law.
Despite vacillating over the answer to that question, McCord seems relentless in her pursuit of a casus belli that will not only justify the abrogation of freedom of speech but of public assembly and other constitutional rights.
Feature photo | The White House is visible behind a large security fence as uniformed Secret Service and FBI agents stand on the street in front of Lafayette Park in the morning hours in Washington. Federal and state law enforcement officials have begun expanded preparations for the possibility of widespread unrest at the polls on Election Day. Andrew Harnik | AP
Raul Diego is a MintPress News Staff Writer, independent photojournalist, researcher, writer and documentary filmmaker.


mintpressnews--2020-11-02--“Sin Begets Sin:” The Fall of Jeremy Corbyn Will be Felt Around the World

There can be little doubt that the ousting of Jeremy Corbyn from the UK Labour Party was the result of a well-planned strategy by a coalition of Zionist organizations , which includes the state of Israel ’ s own Ministry of Strategic Affairs .
And while Corbyn is undoubtedly not anti-semitic , nor racist in way shape , or form , he made one colossal strategic mistake .
He did not fight the Zionist propaganda levied against him nor did he fight the outrageous accusations of anti-semitism that were laid upon him and so many other good hard-working anti-racist members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racist , violent state that peddles enormous amounts of sophisticated weapons to the darkest regimes on earth .
It holds thousands of political prisoners , denies people water , medical care , food , and even the basic most freedoms , simply because they are Palestinian .
In order to shield the country from those who would expose that racism and violence , the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance , or IHRA , created what it calls a working definition of anti-semitism .
It is a new definition that exists to protect Israel from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes to mind is what was wrong with the “ old ” definition of anti-semitism which defined anti-semitism as racism against Jews .
The answer : It was not broad enough to include Israel or Zionism .
Since Israel is a major violator of international law and human rights and has been so from its inception in 1948 , it needed some sort of blanket protection that would shield it and paint its crimes as protection of Jews .
It also needed a tool that would allow it to attack its critics by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempt to conflate anti-semitism ( or racism ) with criticism and rejection of Zionism , which itself is a racist ideology , the IHRA released its “ working definition of antisemitism.
” That definition is a rather sophisticated mechanism that provides blanket protection for Israeli government crimes .
If rejecting Zionism is anti-semitism , as the new definition claims , then all of Israel ’ s critics can be labeled racists , and the so-called “ Jewish state , ” can claim to be a victim of racism .
The following portions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the state of Israel itself .
They are written in a way that places anyone who rejects their premise on the “ wrong ” side of the issue .
The problem is never the issue , but rather pointing it out .
Here are a few examples .
This definition does not actually address Holocaust denial as one might think .
The issue here is that Israel partisans have their own version of what took place during the Holocaust and do not want it to be challenged .
According to the Zionist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state of Israel was the answer to the Holocaust , even though the majority of Holocaust survivors initially chose not to go to the nascent state and many rejected Zionist ideology altogether .
Israel ’ s backers also want to associate Palestinian resistance with Nazis and to conflate Palestinians rejection of its right to exist on their land with the Nazi desire to eliminate the Jewish people .
Israel ’ s apologists also want to silence any conversation about the Holocaust that they are not comfortable with .
Rescue efforts attempted by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Holocaust were ultimately foiled by Zionist groups and discussing the topic often sparks accusations of anti-semitism .
Interestingly , most , if not all of the Jewish people I have spoken to whose families perished in the Holocaust see no problem debating these issues .
During a conversation I had with Rabbi Dovid Feldman of Monsey , New York , the Rabbi asked , “ why would we not want to discuss these issues ?
” According to strict Jewish law , Jews must be loyal citizens to whatever countries they reside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and violent nature of the state of Israel , supporting it is a violation of international law and in some countries , contravenes the laws of the land .
Providing the Israeli government with weapons and funds even contravenes U.S. law due of its use of weapons against unarmed civilians , Zionist organizations that lobby their governments , elected representatives , and civic organizations to support Israel are , in fact , placing the Israeli government above the interests – and indeed the laws – of the countries they live in .
Jewish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serve in the Israeli army , an army whose de facto purpose is the oppression , dispossession , and killing ( or in other words , the terrorizing ) of the Palestinian people .
It is , therefore , not about Jewish people in general , but about Zionists in particular .
To begin with , Israel is not an expression of Jewish self-determination , it is an expression of Zionist and Israeli self-determination .
Jewish people have historically rejected Zionism and there are still large communities and countless individuals who do so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to conflate Zionism and Judaism are obvious .
As for Israel being a racist endeavor , immediately upon its creation , Israel brutally forced Palestinians out of their country and replaced them with Jewish migrants from around the world .
Israel took the land , homes , private and common property , cultivated fields , crops , machinery , livestock , and even the bank accounts of displaced Palestinians .
They then banned their return .
Palestinians became stateless practically overnight while the new state enriched its coffers with stolen property , money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizenship in the newly created state as almost exclusively for Jews .
This definition is meant to shield Israel by criminalizing those dare claim that it is a racist endeavor .
This accusation is little more than an attempt to silence critics of Israel by asking , “ why don ’ t you also criticize Saudi Arabia ?
” The idea that one must list every country that is a violator of human rights when discussing some other regime accused of violating them is absurd .
It is an attempt to shift the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crimes and Zionist racism .
In short , the IHRA ’ s new definition of anti-semitism includes almost everything that Zionists have been accused of doing and defines even pointing out that fact as anti-semitism .
One thing leads to another , or as Jews say , “ Sin Begets Sin.
” The sin here is not anti-semitism , but the capitulation of progressive anti-racist forces in the face of an obvious smear campaign by a racist state and the institutions that represent it in the United Kingdom .
The Board of Deputies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jews in the UK , in reality though , it only represents Zionist Jews .
It is a Zionist organization that places Israeli interests above all else .
How else can one explain its support for the smear campaign against Corbyn and other public servants on one hand , and its silence in the face of Israeli crimes on the other ?
The fall of Jeremy Corbyn at the hands of Zionist organizations is not an issue exclusive to the UK , and its international ramifications are enormous .
There can be no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Affairs , the Israeli Embassy in London , the Jewish Labour Movement , and other Zionists groups that were behind the smear of Corbyn were popping champagne when they heard that he had been suspended from the Labour Party .
The capitulation of Labour was , in fact , an act of suicide .
Under Corbyn ’ s leadership , the party had reached an unprecedented number of members and enjoyed tremendous support .
The creation of the IHRA ’ s new definition of anti-semitism , followed by demands that it be accepted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defamation of Jeremy Corbyn and Labour ’ s top echelon ( people like Ken Livingston and Chris Williamson ) , were all part of a well-planned strategy to punish those who oppose Zionist crimes in Palestine .
Feature photo | Britain ’ s Prime Minister Boris Johnson , right , and now-former Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn , walk through the Commons Members Lobby , during the state opening of Parliament , in London , Dec. 19 , 2019 .
Kirsty Wigglesworth | AP Miko Peled is an author and human rights activist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ author of “ The General ’ s Son .
Journey of an Israeli in Palestine , ” and “ Injustice , the Story of the Holy Land Foundation Five .
”

There can be little doubt that the ousting of Jeremy Corbyn from the UK Labour Party was the result of a well-planned strategy by a coalition of Zionist organizations, which includes the state of Israel’s own Ministry of Strategic Affairs. And while Corbyn is undoubtedly not anti-semitic, nor racist in way shape, or form, he made one colossal strategic mistake. He did not fight the Zionist propaganda levied against him nor did he fight the outrageous accusations of anti-semitism that were laid upon him and so many other good hard-working anti-racist members of his Party.
The IHRA
Israel is a racist, violent state that peddles enormous amounts of sophisticated weapons to the darkest regimes on earth. It holds thousands of political prisoners, denies people water, medical care, food, and even the basic most freedoms, simply because they are Palestinian.
In order to shield the country from those who would expose that racism and violence, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, or IHRA, created what it calls a working definition of anti-semitism. It is a new definition that exists to protect Israel from its critics.
The question that immediately comes to mind is what was wrong with the “old” definition of anti-semitism which defined anti-semitism as racism against Jews. The answer: It was not broad enough to include Israel or Zionism. Since Israel is a major violator of international law and human rights and has been so from its inception in 1948, it needed some sort of blanket protection that would shield it and paint its crimes as protection of Jews. It also needed a tool that would allow it to attack its critics by weaponizing the term anti-semitism.
In an attempt to conflate anti-semitism (or racism) with criticism and rejection of Zionism, which itself is a racist ideology, the IHRA released its “working definition of antisemitism.” That definition is a rather sophisticated mechanism that provides blanket protection for Israeli government crimes. If rejecting Zionism is anti-semitism, as the new definition claims, then all of Israel’s critics can be labeled racists, and the so-called “Jewish state,” can claim to be a victim of racism.
How to silence a conversation
The following portions of the IHRA’s new definition touch on the state of Israel itself. They are written in a way that places anyone who rejects their premise on the “wrong” side of the issue. The problem is never the issue, but rather pointing it out. Here are a few examples.
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.“
This definition does not actually address Holocaust denial as one might think. The issue here is that Israel partisans have their own version of what took place during the Holocaust and do not want it to be challenged.
According to the Zionist version of events, the creation of the state of Israel was the answer to the Holocaust, even though the majority of Holocaust survivors initially chose not to go to the nascent state and many rejected Zionist ideology altogether. Israel’s backers also want to associate Palestinian resistance with Nazis and to conflate Palestinians rejection of its right to exist on their land with the Nazi desire to eliminate the Jewish people.
Israel’s apologists also want to silence any conversation about the Holocaust that they are not comfortable with. Rescue efforts attempted by non-Zionist Jewish organizations in the wake of the Holocaust were ultimately foiled by Zionist groups and discussing the topic often sparks accusations of anti-semitism. Interestingly, most, if not all of the Jewish people I have spoken to whose families perished in the Holocaust see no problem debating these issues. During a conversation I had with Rabbi Dovid Feldman of Monsey, New York, the Rabbi asked, “why would we not want to discuss these issues?”
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.”
According to strict Jewish law, Jews must be loyal citizens to whatever countries they reside in, and because of the racist and violent nature of the state of Israel, supporting it is a violation of international law and in some countries, contravenes the laws of the land. Providing the Israeli government with weapons and funds even contravenes U.S. law due of its use of weapons against unarmed civilians,
Zionist organizations that lobby their governments, elected representatives, and civic organizations to support Israel are, in fact, placing the Israeli government above the interests – and indeed the laws – of the countries they live in.
Jewish citizens from Western countries even volunteer to serve in the Israeli army, an army whose de facto purpose is the oppression, dispossession, and killing (or in other words, the terrorizing) of the Palestinian people. It is, therefore, not about Jewish people in general, but about Zionists in particular.
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
To begin with, Israel is not an expression of Jewish self-determination, it is an expression of Zionist and Israeli self-determination. Jewish people have historically rejected Zionism and there are still large communities and countless individuals who do so today. The IHRA’s attempts to conflate Zionism and Judaism are obvious.
As for Israel being a racist endeavor, immediately upon its creation, Israel brutally forced Palestinians out of their country and replaced them with Jewish migrants from around the world. Israel took the land, homes, private and common property, cultivated fields, crops, machinery, livestock, and even the bank accounts of displaced Palestinians. They then banned their return.
Palestinians became stateless practically overnight while the new state enriched its coffers with stolen property, money, and goods. Israel then defined citizenship in the newly created state as almost exclusively for Jews. This definition is meant to shield Israel by criminalizing those dare claim that it is a racist endeavor.
Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.”
This accusation is little more than an attempt to silence critics of Israel by asking, “why don’t you also criticize Saudi Arabia?” The idea that one must list every country that is a violator of human rights when discussing some other regime accused of violating them is absurd. It is an attempt to shift the conversation away from the issue of Israeli crimes and Zionist racism.
In short, the IHRA’s new definition of anti-semitism includes almost everything that Zionists have been accused of doing and defines even pointing out that fact as anti-semitism.
“Sin Begets Sin”
One thing leads to another, or as Jews say, “Sin Begets Sin.” The sin here is not anti-semitism, but the capitulation of progressive anti-racist forces in the face of an obvious smear campaign by a racist state and the institutions that represent it in the United Kingdom.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews claims to represent all Jews in the UK, in reality though, it only represents Zionist Jews. It is a Zionist organization that places Israeli interests above all else. How else can one explain its support for the smear campaign against Corbyn and other public servants on one hand, and its silence in the face of Israeli crimes on the other?
The fall of Jeremy Corbyn at the hands of Zionist organizations is not an issue exclusive to the UK, and its international ramifications are enormous. There can be no doubt that the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs, the Israeli Embassy in London, the Jewish Labour Movement, and other Zionists groups that were behind the smear of Corbyn were popping champagne when they heard that he had been suspended from the Labour Party.
The capitulation of Labour was, in fact, an act of suicide. Under Corbyn’s leadership, the party had reached an unprecedented number of members and enjoyed tremendous support. The creation of the IHRA’s new definition of anti-semitism, followed by demands that it be accepted by the Labour Party, and the defamation of Jeremy Corbyn and Labour’s top echelon (people like Ken Livingston and Chris Williamson), were all part of a well-planned strategy to punish those who oppose Zionist crimes in Palestine.
Feature photo | Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson, right, and now-former Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn, walk through the Commons Members Lobby, during the state opening of Parliament, in London, Dec. 19, 2019. Kirsty Wigglesworth | AP
Miko Peled is an author and human rights activist born in Jerusalem. He is the author of “The General’s Son. Journey of an Israeli in Palestine,” and “Injustice, the Story of the Holy Land Foundation Five.”


mintpressnews--2020-11-04--It Not About Right or Left, Its About Neoliberalism. Mickey Huff on Big Tech’s Efforts To Purge Diss

It Not About Right or Left, Its About Neoliberalism. Mickey Huff on Big Tech’s Efforts To Purge Dissent

In mid-October , one day after Twitter and Facebook banned a story by the New York Post about a laptop alleged to belong to Hunter Biden , YouTube published a short announcement on its blog called “ Managing harmful conspiracy theories on YouTube ” where new “ efforts to curb hate and harassment by removing more conspiracy theory content used to justify real-world violence.
” In the official statement , the Google subsidiary defined the terms of its growing model of censorship : The video streaming platform ’ s recent expulsion of several popular channels such as The Last American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controversial topics and had accrued a large following over the last few years , were booted from the site in a purge that continues apace as the 2020 election saga unfolds .
A week after the October 15 YouTube blog post , Patreon followed suit , revealing their own plans to “ address the QAnon conspiracy theory ” on the crowd-funding platform for content creators in a move that underscores the economic consequences for people creating content that runs afoul of establishment narratives .
The increasing boldness of private corporations to restrict speech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost exclusively from the hard work , creativity , and data of the users who sign up for them , is just one of the important issues that Project Censored Director Mickey Huff has been fighting to change for years .
Huff joined MintPress to discuss the increasing crackdown on free speech online and much more .
Huff describes Project Censored as a “ critical media literacy education organization , ” that supports “ transparently-sourced , fact-based reporting in the public interest ” in both independent and so-called ‘ mainstream media ’ – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ –preferring the more accurate label of ‘ corporate media ’ to distinguish between the twin currents that drive our post-Internet media landscape .
Founded in 1976 by Prof. Carl Jensen as a media research program at Sonoma State University , the program has matured into one of the pillars of watchdog activism in America , with hundreds of students across the country participating and collaborating with judges and affiliates in other universities to take on the daunting task of keeping the media honest and committed to the exercise of a free press .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ published an annual tome highlighting the year ’ s top censored news stories .
Last year ’ s book , titled “ Censored 2020 – Through The Looking Glass , ” addressed the real agenda behind the issue of ‘ fake news ‘ and rampant disinformation campaigns , which serves the most powerful interests in corporate media and are now at the center of the partisan narratives being disseminated via federal agencies as we approach the November 3 .
MintPress asked Huff about what he called the “ rank partisanship hypocrisy ” surrounding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the true nature of the bias displayed by news outlets and social media platforms , like Twitter , Facebook , and YouTube , in particular , which continue to come under increased scrutiny over their intensified efforts to deplatform and censor along seemingly partisan lines .
“ There is a bias , ” states Huff .
But , according to the head of Project Censored , the bias leans “ towards establishment politics , in general , and what ’ s best for Silicon Valley , ” as opposed to the common perception @ @ @ @ @ @ @ views are more likely to be nixed from the endless stream of online content .
Huff concedes that the Brahmins of Big Tech are far more likely to gravitate to neo-liberal ideas , but insists that censorship of left-wing voices has not been mitigated by such factors , either ; pointing to the equally-influential role of right-wing billionaire networks and the arch-conservative makeup of players in the military-industrial complex , who have been going to far greater lengths to suppress left-wing ideas and movements for decades .
“ If Republicans and conservatives are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and impacting elections , ” says Huff , “ they should look in the mirror.
” The Trump-Russia political cosmology that has dominated corporate media and has lived rent-free in the minds of millions of Americans on social media was a feature from the start of the 2016 presidential race .
The Mueller investigation solidified the state ’ s intention to vilify Russia and other perennial geopolitical targets of the U.S. by using its own bumbling Yeltsin clone to manufacture a tenuous threat to American “ democracy.
” Social media platforms have played @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the tales of Russian election interference .
MintPress asked Huff about these claims , as they are now being weaponized by the establishment to justify a broad , yet selective , deplatforming policy of dissident voices in collusion with the owners of the social networks , themselves .
“ Are there foreign countries interested in manipulating or influencing U.S. elections ?
Of course , ” Huff said .
But , questioned “ to what degree or net effect ” any such interference could possibly have considering what the data shows .
“ If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at that election cycle for context , Russian ads amounted to .0004 % of the total content on Facebook and represented only 1 of 23,000 Facebook newsfeed posts .
Between 2015 and 2017 , Facebook blocked 33 trillion posts , and the Internet Research Agency generated 80,000 of them.
” As for the persistent cries from conservative circles about a liberal conspiracy to shut down right-leaning social media channels , “ it turns out that right-wing propaganda and right-wing voices are actually louder on Twitter and Facebook .
They get retweeted more , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reflect an equal opportunity approach to censorship that Huff qualifies as “ a bipartisan effort to control the public narrative , ” and accounts for the fact “ that people further to the right and further to the left are marginalized and are kept out of the discussions and debates.
” Huff cuts social media companies some slack , but only in light of their ability to incorporate so-called “ community standards , ” which are vague and open-ended notions of civility Big Tech has used to police user activity in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ content , particularly on the far right that is very xenophobic or racist and that ’ s very problematic , ” he admitted .
“ But , we need to talk about how to best handle those types of situations if we want to protect free speech.
” “ We are heading into a neoliberal dystopian morass ruled by technocrats and plutocrats where data is the new currency like oil , and we are all being used by these companies on their circuit board plantations.
” Huff ’ s use of the plantation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ digital ecosystem currently under construction is more than apt , considering the exploitative dynamic that undergirds the billions of dollars generated by these enormous concerns with , essentially , free labor from millions upon millions of content creators .
“ It ’ s in the interest of the owners and investors of these companies to control content to the degree to which it affects their profit margin , ” Huff noted , but highlighted the deliberate intention to create “ a group of addicted users , so that they would willingly be used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to love our servitude through the telescreen.
” “ The people that designed these platforms knew what they were doing , ” he continued , adding that the lopsided power dynamic represented by powerful private corporations and millions of content ( and data ) slaves they profit from is “ a real conundrum , ” because “ most of the general public has no idea how these systems work and tech companies haven ’ t exactly been forthcoming about how their own [ proprietary ] algorithms and bots work.
” Ultimately , Huff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get to the root of that whole problem unless we look at the problem of global corporate capitalism and racial capitalism , as it exists as a system of global oppression.
” Understanding the technical aspects of how these platforms and their technology really work is vital to our ability to fight back against their relentless encroachment into our lives and society , as a whole .
Both the expectation of privacy and freedom of expression are under simultaneous attack by a burgeoning technocratic superstructure , which is being set up at many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and related information communications technologies .
The AI revolution being instigated by supranational organizations like the World Economic Forum and their powerful partners demand a new censorship paradigm that can restore the fourth estate to its former glory in a hyper-communicated world by drowning out the inconvenient truths dug up by pesky independent researchers , journalists or any individual with a mind of their own and access to a treasure trove of online sources .
Huff points out that “ the kinds of censorship that take place online , particularly in social media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ driven.
” While this fact undermines a broader perception of the evil tech CEO mastermind , such as the “ idea that [ Jack ] Dorsey or [ Mark ] Zuckerberg get out the red pen and start scratching names off of a list somewhere , ” the “ net result ” is the same , according to Huff .
“ It ’ s not just the think tanks and hired guns that go and excise in their confirmation bias fashion , ” he explains .
But , on the other hand , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in and regulate social networks – such as the recent rumblings over Section 230 of the Communications Act – could be a case of jumping from the fire into the frying pan .
“ If we assume that , somehow , government is more of an objective observer , with all the K-street money and lobbying and big tech sector money and everything else that goes in there , it ’ s almost like a shell game.
” Trying not to come off as too cynical , Huff nevertheless believes that if we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the interests pushing us into a dystopian nightmare of perpetual surveillance and censorship , tweaks to a few lines in the U.S. Code is not going to be enough .
Huff is unambiguous about his own particular vision about how we can solve these modern riddles of power : “ We need long term strategies for critical media literacy education and civic engagement.
” Project Censored and its parent , the Media Freedom Foundation , are carrying this vision forward by edifying the general public about these problems “ in a way that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s based on critical pedagogy to understand systems of power and oppression and use media as a way of informing and teaching the public to have our voice heard loudly enough in these oligarchic sectors.
” Despite the daunting nature of such an endeavor , Mickey Huff is undeterred and takes inspiration from Ralph Nader ’ s words to forge ahead : “ We need to break through power and it ’ s easier than we think.
” Mickey Huff is the current director of Project Censored , founded in 1976 , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He is a professor of social science and history and executive producer and host of The Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio .
He serves on the editorial board for the journal Secrecy and Society , and is a board member of Behind the Headlines .
Project Censored ’ s newest edition of the year ’ s top censored news stories , “ State of the Free Press | 2021 ” is due out December 1st .
It ’ s latest documentary , “ United States of Distraction : Fighting the Fake @ @ @ @ @ @ @

In mid-October, one day after Twitter and Facebook banned a story by the New York Post about a laptop alleged to belong to Hunter Biden, YouTube published a short announcement on its blog called “Managing harmful conspiracy theories on YouTube” where new “efforts to curb hate and harassment by removing more conspiracy theory content used to justify real-world violence.”
In the official statement, the Google subsidiary defined the terms of its growing model of censorship:
Today we’re further expanding both our hate and harassment policies to prohibit content that targets an individual or group with conspiracy theories that have been used to justify real-world violence. One example would be content that threatens or harasses someone by suggesting they are complicit in one of these harmful conspiracies, such as QAnon or Pizzagate.”
The video streaming platform’s recent expulsion of several popular channels such as The Last American Vagabond, which provided political commentary on controversial topics and had accrued a large following over the last few years, were booted from the site in a purge that continues apace as the 2020 election saga unfolds. A week after the October 15 YouTube blog post, Patreon followed suit, revealing their own plans to “address the QAnon conspiracy theory” on the crowd-funding platform for content creators in a move that underscores the economic consequences for people creating content that runs afoul of establishment narratives.
The increasing boldness of private corporations to restrict speech that is allowed on platforms that profit almost exclusively from the hard work, creativity, and data of the users who sign up for them, is just one of the important issues that Project Censored Director Mickey Huff has been fighting to change for years. Huff joined MintPress to discuss the increasing crackdown on free speech online and much more.
A fight that’s just beginning
Huff describes Project Censored as a “critical media literacy education organization,” that supports “transparently-sourced, fact-based reporting in the public interest” in both independent and so-called ‘mainstream media’ – a term he takes exception to, –preferring the more accurate label of ‘corporate media’ to distinguish between the twin currents that drive our post-Internet media landscape.
Founded in 1976 by Prof. Carl Jensen as a media research program at Sonoma State University, the program has matured into one of the pillars of watchdog activism in America, with hundreds of students across the country participating and collaborating with judges and affiliates in other universities to take on the daunting task of keeping the media honest and committed to the exercise of a free press.
Ever since 1993, Project Censored has published an annual tome highlighting the year’s top censored news stories. Last year’s book, titled “Censored 2020 – Through The Looking Glass,” addressed the real agenda behind the issue of ‘fake news‘ and rampant disinformation campaigns, which serves the most powerful interests in corporate media and are now at the center of the partisan narratives being disseminated via federal agencies as we approach the November 3.
MintPress asked Huff about what he called the “rank partisanship hypocrisy” surrounding the present state of American media and the true nature of the bias displayed by news outlets and social media platforms, like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, in particular, which continue to come under increased scrutiny over their intensified efforts to deplatform and censor along seemingly partisan lines.
“There is a bias,” states Huff. But, according to the head of Project Censored, the bias leans “towards establishment politics, in general, and what’s best for Silicon Valley,” as opposed to the common perception held by many conservatives, that right-wing views are more likely to be nixed from the endless stream of online content.
Huff concedes that the Brahmins of Big Tech are far more likely to gravitate to neo-liberal ideas, but insists that censorship of left-wing voices has not been mitigated by such factors, either; pointing to the equally-influential role of right-wing billionaire networks and the arch-conservative makeup of players in the military-industrial complex, who have been going to far greater lengths to suppress left-wing ideas and movements for decades. “If Republicans and conservatives are really concerned about money in Silicon Valley and impacting elections,” says Huff, “they should look in the mirror.”
Who’s on first?
The Trump-Russia political cosmology that has dominated corporate media and has lived rent-free in the minds of millions of Americans on social media was a feature from the start of the 2016 presidential race. The Mueller investigation solidified the state’s intention to vilify Russia and other perennial geopolitical targets of the U.S. by using its own bumbling Yeltsin clone to manufacture a tenuous threat to American “democracy.”
Social media platforms have played an essential role in circulating and reinforcing the tales of Russian election interference. MintPress asked Huff about these claims, as they are now being weaponized by the establishment to justify a broad, yet selective, deplatforming policy of dissident voices in collusion with the owners of the social networks, themselves.
“Are there foreign countries interested in manipulating or influencing U.S. elections? Of course,” Huff said. But, questioned “to what degree or net effect” any such interference could possibly have considering what the data shows.
“If you actually go and take a look at that election cycle for context, Russian ads amounted to .0004% of the total content on Facebook and represented only 1 of 23,000 Facebook newsfeed posts. Between 2015 and 2017, Facebook blocked 33 trillion posts, and the Internet Research Agency generated 80,000 of them.”
As for the persistent cries from conservative circles about a liberal conspiracy to shut down right-leaning social media channels, “it turns out that right-wing propaganda and right-wing voices are actually louder on Twitter and Facebook. They get retweeted more,” Huff states.
The reality seems to reflect an equal opportunity approach to censorship that Huff qualifies as “a bipartisan effort to control the public narrative,” and accounts for the fact “that people further to the right and further to the left are marginalized and are kept out of the discussions and debates.”
Huff cuts social media companies some slack, but only in light of their ability to incorporate so-called “community standards,” which are vague and open-ended notions of civility Big Tech has used to police user activity in their TOS agreements. “There is some content, particularly on the far right that is very xenophobic or racist and that’s very problematic,” he admitted. “But, we need to talk about how to best handle those types of situations if we want to protect free speech.”
The E-plantation
“We are heading into a neoliberal dystopian morass ruled by technocrats and plutocrats where data is the new currency like oil, and we are all being used by these companies on their circuit board plantations.”
Huff’s use of the plantation model as an analogy for the algorithmically-controlled digital ecosystem currently under construction is more than apt, considering the exploitative dynamic that undergirds the billions of dollars generated by these enormous concerns with, essentially, free labor from millions upon millions of content creators.
“It’s in the interest of the owners and investors of these companies to control content to the degree to which it affects their profit margin,” Huff noted, but highlighted the deliberate intention to create “a group of addicted users, so that they would willingly be used in ‘Huxleyan’ style to grow to love our servitude through the telescreen.”
“The people that designed these platforms knew what they were doing,” he continued, adding that the lopsided power dynamic represented by powerful private corporations and millions of content (and data) slaves they profit from is “a real conundrum,” because “most of the general public has no idea how these systems work and tech companies haven’t exactly been forthcoming about how their own [proprietary] algorithms and bots work.”
Ultimately, Huff believes society “can’t really get to the root of that whole problem unless we look at the problem of global corporate capitalism and racial capitalism, as it exists as a system of global oppression.”
Break on through
Understanding the technical aspects of how these platforms and their technology really work is vital to our ability to fight back against their relentless encroachment into our lives and society, as a whole. Both the expectation of privacy and freedom of expression are under simultaneous attack by a burgeoning technocratic superstructure, which is being set up at many levels of our material reality through 5G and related information communications technologies.
The AI revolution being instigated by supranational organizations like the World Economic Forum and their powerful partners demand a new censorship paradigm that can restore the fourth estate to its former glory in a hyper-communicated world by drowning out the inconvenient truths dug up by pesky independent researchers, journalists or any individual with a mind of their own and access to a treasure trove of online sources.
Huff points out that “the kinds of censorship that take place online, particularly in social media or in search engines is often algorithmically driven.” While this fact undermines a broader perception of the evil tech CEO mastermind, such as the “idea that [Jack] Dorsey or [Mark] Zuckerberg get out the red pen and start scratching names off of a list somewhere,” the “net result” is the same, according to Huff.
“It’s not just the think tanks and hired guns that go and excise in their confirmation bias fashion,” he explains. But, on the other hand, moves at the federal level to step in and regulate social networks – such as the recent rumblings over Section 230 of the Communications Act – could be a case of jumping from the fire into the frying pan.
“If we assume that, somehow, government is more of an objective observer, with all the K-street money and lobbying and big tech sector money and everything else that goes in there, it’s almost like a shell game.” Trying not to come off as too cynical, Huff nevertheless believes that if we are to assert our collective will over the interests pushing us into a dystopian nightmare of perpetual surveillance and censorship, tweaks to a few lines in the U.S. Code is not going to be enough.
Huff is unambiguous about his own particular vision about how we can solve these modern riddles of power: “We need long term strategies for critical media literacy education and civic engagement.” Project Censored and its parent, the Media Freedom Foundation, are carrying this vision forward by edifying the general public about these problems “in a way that’s not indoctrinated, that’s based on critical pedagogy to understand systems of power and oppression and use media as a way of informing and teaching the public to have our voice heard loudly enough in these oligarchic sectors.”
Despite the daunting nature of such an endeavor, Mickey Huff is undeterred and takes inspiration from Ralph Nader’s words to forge ahead: “We need to break through power and it’s easier than we think.”
Mickey Huff is the current director of Project Censored, founded in 1976, and president of the nonprofit Media Freedom Foundation. He is a professor of social science and history and executive producer and host of The Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio. He serves on the editorial board for the journal Secrecy and Society, and is a board member of Behind the Headlines.
Project Censored’s newest edition of the year’s top censored news stories, “State of the Free Press | 2021” is due out December 1st. It’s latest documentary, “United States of Distraction: Fighting the Fake News Invasion” is available online.
Feature photo | Graphic by MintPress News
Raul Diego is a MintPress News Staff Writer, independent photojournalist, researcher, writer and documentary filmmaker.