Behind Jewgle, Jew-book?--CIA and tax-payer funds which started, built monopolies, really utilities

Apollonian

Guest Columnist
Social media censorship—here are the deep basics

Aug 20 by Jon Rappoport
Posted by Chris of the family Masters on August 20, 2018 at 6:10pm

Link: http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/so...-deep-basics-aug-20-by-jon?xg_source=activity

Orchestrated un-creation of the fabric of free speech—this is what we’re seeing.

Several of the biggest “conservative/libertarian” figures on the Net—Alex Jones, Dennis Prager, Stefan Molyneux, among others—have recently been banned/censored by Google, Facebook, Twitter, and other social media companies.

When you ask why this is happening, one obvious answer pops up right away:

These social media corporations are fulfilling desperate pleas from major news outlets, who have been losing audience, in massive chunks, to the likes of Jones, Prager, and Molyneaux.

The newspapers and TV news networks came to end of their rope. They had no solutions to their problem—so they went to Google, Facebook, and others, and said, HELP US. Meaning: Censor our competition.

On one level, understanding censorship is that simple.

But then you have to ask yourself this question: Why would Google, Facebook, and other social media giants bend to the needs of mainstream news outlets?

These social media operations are richer and bigger than mainstream news. They could easily have said: “No, we like open forums and a wide variety of opinion, and we think people should be able to deal with ideas they don’t like. We stand for an open society, and we vigorously defend the 1st Amendment.”

But they didn’t say that. Instead, they’re enacting bans and censorship. Why?

The obvious answer staring us in the face is: Google and Facebook and You Tube, for example, the largest social media corporations, are not “free companies.”

They’ve been in bed with the intelligence community for a long time, and they favor wall to wall surveillance of the population. They favor the “liberal” version of a policed State, where correct opinions are let in the door and incorrect opinions are shut down.

Let’s quickly review a bit of Facebook history:

The big infusion of cash that sent Mark Zuckerberg and his fledgling college enterprise on their way came from Accel Partners, in 2004.

Jim Breyer, head of Accel, attached a $13 million rocket to Facebook, and nothing has ever been the same.

Earlier that same year, a man named Gilman Louie joined the board of the National Venture Capital Association of America (NVCA). The chairman of NVCA? Jim Breyer. Gilman Louie happened to be the first CEO of the important CIA start-up, In-Q-Tel.

In-Q-Tel was founded in 1999, with the express purpose of funding companies that could develop technology the CIA would use to “gather data.”

That’s not the only connection between Jim Breyer and the CIA’s man, Gilman Louie. In 2004, Louie went to work for BBN Technologies, headed up by Breyer. Dr. Anita Jones also joined BBN at that time. Jones had worked for In-Q-Tel and was an adviser to DARPA, the Pentagon’s technology department that helped develop the Internet.

With these CIA/DARPA connections, it’s no surprise that Jim Breyer’s jackpot investment in Facebook is not part of the popular mythology of Mark Zuckerberg. Better to omit it. Who could fail to realize that Facebook, with its endless stream of personal data, and its tracking capability, is an ideal CIA asset?

What about Google?

Read Nafeez Ahmed’s (twitter) excellent multi-part series at medium.com, “How the CIA made Google”:

“INSURGE INTELLIGENCE (twitter) can now reveal the vast extent to which the US intelligence community is implicated in nurturing the web platforms we know today…The lynchpin of this story is the corporation that in many ways defines the 21st century with its unobtrusive omnipresence: Google.”

“Google styles itself as a friendly, funky, user-friendly tech firm that rose to prominence through a combination of skill, luck, and genuine innovation. This is true. But it is a mere fragment of the story. In reality, Google is a smokescreen behind which lurks the US military-industrial complex.”

“The inside story of Google’s rise, revealed here for the first time, opens a can of worms that goes far beyond Google, unexpectedly shining a light on the existence of a parasitical network driving the evolution of the US national security apparatus, and profiting obscenely from its operation…”

In other words, social media aren’t banning and censoring “conservatives/libertarians” merely as a favor to their kissing cousins who run major news outlets—no, this goes much deeper.

This is the intelligence and Pentagon communities, with their attendant neo-cons and military contractors, defending their version of the “new world.”

Anyone with a large online audience, who has strong opinions which resist and run counter to this new world vision, is considered an obstacle, and a target for censorship.

The intelligence/Pentagon vision? Endless wars; endless waves of migration engendering chaos; multinational corporations free to roam the planet, set up shop in hellholes, produce their goods for relative pennies, sell those goods anywhere with no tariffs, thus undermining local economies and centralizing economic power in fewer hands; the vast expansion of surveillance and censorship (which go hand in hand); widening poverty, which makes more and more people dependent on government…

Social media censorship isn’t merely a bunch of knee-jerk liberals trying to stop ideas they don’t like. It is that, but it’s much, much, much more.

Google and Facebook are nurtured creatures of the national security state.
 
BIAS OBJECTIVELY CONFIRMED. Wall Street Journal testing shows Google altering search results in real time

November 15, 2019 by IWB
by AccipiterQ

Link: https://www.investmentwatchblog.com...-google-altering-search-results-in-real-time/

here their main article on the front page right now

The internet giant uses blacklists, algorithm tweaks and an army of contractors to shape what you see

Every minute, an estimated 3.8 million queries are typed into Google, prompting its algorithms to spit out results for hotel rates or breast-cancer treatments or the latest news about President Trump.

They are arguably the most powerful lines of computer code in the global economy, controlling how much of the world accesses information found on the internet, and the starting point for billions of dollars of commerce.
 
Google Admits That “Others” Can Access The Camera On Samsung & Android Smartphones

Link: https://www.activistpost.com/2019/1...he-camera-on-samsung-android-smartphones.html
.
November 23, 2019
By Alanna Ketler

◾The Facts: Hackers have successfully been able to access the front facing cameras on Google and Samsung phones without permission from the user and regardless of whether or not the phone was unlocked. They were able to take pictures and record video.

◾Reflect On: Why should you care? This is an outright invasion of our right to privacy. If we continue to willingly give up all our rights, soon we won’t have any left.

As handy as they are, our smartphones are literally portable tracking devices. Equipped with GPS technology, people can easily be located; and for most Android users a record of where they’ve been each day since they’ve had their fancy phones is stored online. If that’s not creepy enough, the microphones on our phones are also able to record our conversations because they are listening even when we don’t think they are. Finally, you know those handy front-facing cameras often used to capture the perfect selfie? Recently, researchers have revealed how this camera can be used to spy on users. Who would have thought?
.
The security research team from Checkmarx has uncovered a major vulnerability that is affecting Google and Samsung smartphones and has a potential to impact the hundreds of millions of Android users across the globe. Apparently, it’s now fixed, but the researchers discovered a way for a hacker to take control of the front-facing camera and remotely take photos, record video, listen in on your conversations and more. All happening silently in the background without your awareness.

And, although it’s important to note that the following is merely speculation, if hackers have the ability to do this, then you better believe that the NSA and other high-level government agencies are able to do the same thing.

This isn’t something new, Edward Snowden, NSA whistleblower, and many others like him have talked about and have explained how our phones are actually used to spy on us.

What Did The Checkmarx Security Research Team Find?

Their research began on the Google camera app on the Pixel 2XL and Pixel3 smartphones, they found a few vulnerabilities which were initiated by allowing an attacker to remotely bypass user permissions. Apparently, facial recognition, fingerprint and password security are not as secure as we’ve been led to believe.

“Our team found a way of manipulating specific actions and intents,” Erez Yalon, director of security research at Checkmarx said, “making it possible for any application, without specific permissions, to control the Google Camera app. This same technique also applied to Samsung’s Camera app.”

Davey Winder, from Forbes.com explains how an attacker is able to exploit the Google Camera app vulnerabilities,

Checkmarx created a proof of concept (PoC) exploit by developing a malicious application, a weather app of the type that is perennially popular in the Google Play Store. This app didn’t require any special permissions other than basic storage access. By just requesting this single, commonplace permission, the app would be unlikely to set off user alarm bells. We are, after all, conditioned to question unnecessary and extensive permission requests rather than a single, common one. This app, however, was far from harmless. It came in two parts, the client app running on the smartphone and a command and control server that it connects to in order to do the bidding of the attacker. Once the app is installed and started, it would create a persistent connection to that command and control server and then sit and wait for instructions. Closing the app did not close that server connection. What instructions could be sent by the attacker, resulting in what actions?

I hope you are sitting down as it’s a lengthy and worrying list.

◾Take a photo using the smartphone camera and upload it to the command server.

◾Record video using the smartphone camera and upload it to the command server.

◾Wait for a voice call to start, by monitoring the smartphone proximity sensor to determine when the phone is held to the ear and record the audio from both sides of the conversation.

◾During those monitored calls, the attacker could also record video of the user at the same time as capturing audio.

◾Capture GPS tags from all photos taken and use these to locate the owner on a global map.

◾Access and copy stored photo and video information, as well as the images captured during an attack.

◾Operate stealthily by silencing the smartphone while taking photos and recording videos, so no camera shutter sounds to alert the user.

◾The photo and video recording activity could be initiated regardless of whether the smartphone was unlocked.

Of course, when Google was confronted about this alarming issue they seemed glad to hear about it so that they could fix the problem, telling Winder after he reached out,

We appreciate Checkmarx bringing this to our attention and working with Google and Android partners to coordinate disclosure. The issue was addressed on impacted Google devices via a Play Store update to the Google Camera Application in July 2019. A patch has also been made available to all partners.

Why Should You Care?

While it is great that they are enhancing their security, there is no doubt in my opinion that hackers can find a way to get around the new security. What’s even more alarming than hackers is government agencies having the ability to turn on your camera and “check in” on you whenever they please without your permission, or your awareness.

Sound Familiar?

This is literally Orwell’s 1984 coming to life! If you are unfamiliar with this book, firstly, I highly recommend it; secondly, it basically foreshadows a totalitarian government referred to as “Big Brother” that is constantly watching and spying on citizens to ensure they are following the rules set forth by the State. As Orwell writes,

The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it; moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever the wanted to. You had to live- did live, from habit that became instinct- in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.

and..

He thought of the telescreen with its never-sleeping ear. They could spy upon you night and day, but if you kept your head you could still outwit them. With all their cleverness they had never mastered the secret of finding out what another human being was thinking. . . . Facts, at any rate, could not be kept hidden. They could be tracked down by inquiry, they could be squeezed out of you by torture. But if the object was not to stay alive but to stay human, what difference did it ultimately make? They could not alter your feelings; for that matter you could not alter them yourself, even if you wanted to. They could lay bare in the utmost detail everything that you had done or said or thought; but the inner heart, whose workings were mysterious even to yourself, remained impregnable.

So, What Can We Do?

I’m sure there are a great number of you out there who are thinking, I’ve got nothing to hide, so who cares? This is a very passive stance, and it’s not about whether or not you are participating in illegal activities and/or are worried about being sentenced to jail or caught by authorities, it’s about our right to privacy. As whistleblower Edward Snowden has said, “Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.”

But, to each their own. Some steps you can take to protect your privacy,

◾Tape the front facing camera on your device while you’re not using it.

◾You may want to put some sticky tack over the microphone when you’re not using it as well.

◾Turn off your phone when not in use.

◾Simply use your phone less, and when not on it, put it in a different room.

◾You may want to be extra cautious when changing, or plotting to overthrow your government.

◾You can actually buy nifty little sliding covers to block your camera for your phone and computer.

◾Personally, I’ve been toying with the idea of going back to a good ol’ basic flip phone… not just for the security and privacy measures, but to avoid wasting so much time.


Hi, I’m Alanna! My journey really began in 2007 when I began to question what was being presented to me, my path led me to Collective Evolution and I joined the team in 2010. Wow, has it been an incredible journey so far! I am extremely passionate about learning new information! I aim to have a voice for animals and animal rights, I also enjoy writing about health, consciousness and I am very interested in psychedelics for healing purposes! I strongly believe that knowledge is power, and the first step to creating change on this planet is by raising awareness. “If we could see the miracle of a single flower clearly, our whole life would change.” -Jack Kornfield Questions or comments? Email me alanna@collective-evolution.com

This article was sourced from Collective Evolution. [see https://www.collective-evolution.co...ss-the-camera-on-samsung-android-smartphones/ ]
 
After creating the world’s most dangerous and evil tech company, Google founders leave, turning it over to fascists who hate humanity

December 5, 2019 by IWB
by: Ethan Huff

Link: https://www.investmentwatchblog.com...urning-it-over-to-fascists-who-hate-humanity/

Image: After creating the world’s most dangerous and evil tech company, Google founders leave, turning it over to fascists who hate humanity

(Natural News) In what may come as a shock to many, Google co-founder Larry Page, the longtime CEO of Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent company, along with fellow Google co-founder Sergey Brin, have announced their resignation from the world’s most dangerous and evil tech company amid ongoing probes into Google’s censorship agenda.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai, who infamously lied to Congress about Google’s “manual” interventions with user search results, will reportedly take Page’s former role, making him the CEO of both Google and Alphabet at the same time.

While Page and Brin will stay on as shareholders and members of Alphabet’s Board of Directors, Pichai will be the new head of, well, everything related to Google. But this doesn’t necessarily clear Page and Brin of running what critics claim is “top-down control” over Google search results, and specifically political search results.

Most recently, Google announced that it would be banning upwards of 300 different advertisements put out by the Donald Trump campaign for the 2020 presidency, claiming that the ads violate its internal policies. The Trump campaign has publicly responded by claiming that Google is “muzzling” political speech to thwart the upcoming election.

In their departure letter, Page and Brin admitted that Google is not a “conventional company,” adding that Google’s “evolution as a privately held company” means that Google has had to be managed “differently.”

They still insist, however, just as Pichai does, that Google provides “unbiased, accurate and free access to information for those who rely on us all around the world.”

“We believe those central tenets are still true today,” the duo further wrote about Google and Alphabet. “Creativity and challenge remain as ever-present as before, if not more so, and are increasingly applied to a variety of fields such as machine learning, energy efficiency and transportation.”

Google wants to control transportation, medicine, infrastructure, and all other aspects of people’s daily lives

Alphabet, in case you’re unaware, has only existed since 2015. It was created as part of Google’s unveiling of other new technologies, including Waymo driverless cars, which Page and Brin claim are already successfully driving around “hundreds of Phoenix residents.”

Alphabet has also unveiled Wing, which Page and Brin describe as “the first drone company to make commercial deliveries to consumers in the US,” as well as Verily Life Sciences, a sister company of Google that we reported released more than 20 million genetically modified (GMO) mosquitoes into the wild back in 2017.

We also saw Google, via Alphabet, launch its own biotechnology company under the name of Calico back in 2013. Headed by Art Levinson, chairman of Genentech, Calico represents Google’s attempt at focusing “on health and well-being, in particular the challenge of aging and associated diseases,” according to Page.

Google also recently announced that it’s getting into the medical records business as part of an Orwellian program known as “Project Nightingale.”

With the help of a medical group known as Ascension, Google is reportedly amassing the medical records of tens of millions of patients across 21 states, all of which will be compiled into Google’s own private databases, where artificial intelligence (AI) systems will make recommendations to patients about treatments, drug regimens and other protocols.

“Before they were Alphabet, Larry and Sergey touted, ‘Don’t be evil’ as part of their company mission,” wrote one Breitbart News commenter in response to the news. “Then (they) hired Eric ‘Squirrel Boy’ Schmidt as CEO. The IG report is about to be released and it’ll be interesting to see where these three bozos end up.”

For more related news about Google, be sure to check out EvilGoogle.news.

Sources for this article include:

Breitbart.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com
 
DOJ Announces Proposals To Strip Section 230 Immunity From Big Tech

These reforms will ensure that Section 230 immunity incentivizes online platforms to be responsible actors,’ says AG Barr

Jamie White | Infowars.com - June 17, 2020 61 Comments

Link: https://www.infowars.com/doj-announces-proposals-to-strip-section-230-immunity-from-big-tech/

The Department of Justice announced a set of proposals to remove legal protections enjoyed by Big Tech that allows them to behave as both a platform and a publisher.

The department said in a statement Wednesday that its proposals would update Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 to include accountability for antitrust violations made by tech companies against users.

“When it comes to issues of public safety, the government is the one who must act on behalf of society at large. Law enforcement cannot delegate our obligations to protect the safety of the American people purely to the judgment of profit-seeking private firms. We must shape the incentives for companies to create a safer environment, which is what Section 230 was originally intended to do,” said Attorney General William Barr in a statement.

“Taken together, these reforms will ensure that Section 230 immunity incentivizes online platforms to be responsible actors. These reforms are targeted at platforms to make certain they are appropriately addressing illegal and exploitive content while continuing to preserve a vibrant, open, and competitive internet.”

“These twin objectives of giving online platforms the freedom to grow and innovate while encouraging them to moderate content responsibly were the core objectives of Section 230 at the outset. The Department’s proposal aims to realize these objectives more fully and clearly in order for Section 230 to better serve the interests of the American people,” he concluded.

Four key areas are identified in the DOJ’s review of Big Tech reform:

1. Incentivizing Online Platforms to Address Illicit Content
The first category of potential reforms is aimed at incentivizing platforms to address the growing amount of illicit content online, while preserving the core of Section 230’s immunity for defamation.

2. Clarifying Federal Government Enforcement Capabilities
A second category reform would increase the ability of the government to protect citizens from harmful and illicit conduct. These reforms would make clear that the immunity provided by Section 230 does not apply to civil enforcement actions brought by the federal government. Civil enforcement by the federal government is an important complement to criminal prosecution.

3. Promoting Competition
A third reform proposal is to clarify that federal antitrust claims are not covered by Section 230 immunity. Over time, the avenues for engaging in both online commerce and speech have concentrated in the hands of a few key players. It makes little sense to enable large online platforms (particularly dominant ones) to invoke Section 230 immunity in antitrust cases, where liability is based on harm to competition, not on third-party speech.

4. Promoting Open Discourse and Greater Transparency
A fourth category of potential reforms is intended to clarify the text and original purpose of the statute in order to promote free and open discourse online and encourage greater transparency between platforms and users.

Barr had said in an interview last week that companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Google were “clearly engaging in censorship” and that measures would be taken to address it.

“I think there are — clearly these, these entities are now engaged in censorship,” Barr told Fox News. “And they originally held themselves out as open forums where people, where the third parties could come and express their views and they built up a tremendous network of eyeballs.”

“They had a lot of market power based on that presentation,” the attorney general added. “And now they are acting much more like publishers because they’re censoring particular viewpoints and putting their own content in there to to diminish the impact of various people’s views.”

DOJ’s announcement comes on the heels of Google collaborating with NBC News to demonetize The Federalist over its comments section on Tuesday.

This also comes two weeks after President Trump signed an executive order declaring his administration would review Section 230 and make policy recommendations that protect the American people from online censorship and blacklisting by Big Tech.

Republican lawmakers like Senators Josh Hawley (Mo.) and Ted Cruz (Texas) are also taking steps to address the monopoly powers wield by the Silicon Valley tech overlords at Google and others.

NEW: Sen. Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) is sending Google CEO Sundar Pichai this letter in the morning in response to the company’s “transparently politically motivated” move to “demonetize” The @FDRLST. Read here: pic.twitter.com/KgjTOJNCL4

— Henry Rodgers (@henryrodgersdc) June 17, 2020

Today I’m introducing new legislation to combat #BigTech censorship. It gives users the right to sue if the big platforms enforce their terms unfairly or unequally. Proud to be joined by ⁦@marcorubio⁩ ⁦@SenTomCotton ⁦@SenatorBraun⁩ https://t.co/OcvXfHXPYk

— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) June 17, 2020

Twitter: Follow @WhiteIsTheFury

Gab: https://gab.com/WhiteIsTheFury

Minds: https://www.minds.com/whiteisthefury
 
Carlson's commentary on actual, existing censorship by Jew-tube, Jew monopolies, Jews-media--though he won't name the kikes (and Satanists)--could that be big part of the very problem?




More commentary by Sen. Cruz

 
Twitter Locks Trump Jr Account For Posting Press Conference By Pro-Hydroxychloroquine Doctors

Link: https://www.zerohedge.com/political...ess-conference-pro-hydroxychloroquine-doctors

by Tyler Durden
Tue, 07/28/2020 - 10:15

Twitter locked the account of Donald Trump Jr. for approximately 12 hours, after the president's son posted a viral video of doctors touting Hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19.

BREAKING: @Twitter & @jack have suspended @DonaldJTrumpJr for posting a viral video of medical doctors talking about Hydroxychloroquine.

Big Tech is the biggest threat to free expression in America today & they're continuing to engage in open election interference - full stop. pic.twitter.com/7dJbauq43O
— Andrew Surabian (@Surabees) July 28, 2020

The press conference, which received over 14 million views before it was blacklisted and scrubbed by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, featured members of America's Frontline Doctors - a recently formed advocacy group which claims that "American life has fallen casualty to a massive disinformation campaign" against Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) - a decades-old malaria drug used by India and several other countries as part of their front-line treatment of the novel coronavirus, yet which has shown mixed efficacy in studies.

The blacklisting began on Facebook following a complaint by New York Times columnist Kevin Roose.

The #2 most-engaged post on Facebook today is a Breitbart video of a group of doctors claiming that hydroxychloroquine is "a cure for Covid" and "you don't need a mask."

14 million views in 6 hours. (For scale, Plandemic got ~8 million in a few days.)
— Kevin Roose (@kevinroose) July 28, 2020

After which a Facebook spokesman said that it was removed for "sharing false information about cures and treatments for COVID-19."

The video appears to have been taken down from Facebook.
— Kevin Roose (@kevinroose) July 28, 2020

Social media companies are censoring videos of Dr. Stella Immanuel and the other doctors involved in real-time because that’s what Democrats want them to do. Many doctors & studies say hydroxychloroquine works. They don’t want @realDonaldTrump to be right. pic.twitter.com/v2xHu0hsM4
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) July 28, 2020

Reactions to Silicon Valley's decision to scrub the press conference, as well as Trump Jr.'s temporary suspension, have drawn the ire of supporters and free speech advocates alike.

Facebook isn't unbiased... the comms guy representing them on Twitter spent his ENTIRE CAREER working for Democrats in Congress before going to FACEBOOK. https://t.co/av8pSYKn4r
— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) July 28, 2020

Now @YouTube has pulled the video of the doctors. I don’t care if you think the doctors are geniuses or nuts. If you value the foundations of our country, you should be questioning why social media companies are colluding to stop licensed doctors from expressing opinions freely.
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) July 28, 2020

Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are taking this video down.

This is an extremely dangerous precedent to set for the media.

Posting a video does not necessarily mean you agree with all of it’s content or that it’s entirely true.

Big Tech should be careful for their own good.. pic.twitter.com/ECKk5rysx6
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) July 28, 2020

For those who dare view the dangerous wrongthink at the heart of the controversy and draw their own conclusions, click here.
 
Zuckerberg-Funded Group Comes Into Spotlight in Election-Related Court Cases

By Zachary Stieber
November 28, 2020 Updated: November 29, 2020

Link: https://www.theepochtimes.com/zucke...dium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2020-11-28-4

A group that received hundreds of millions of dollars from Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is accused in post-election lawsuits of contributing to constitutional violations in key battleground states.

The Center for Tech and Civic Life, a national nonprofit based in Illinois, provided funding to over 2,500 election offices across the country to run elections amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Funds were used to pay poll workers, put up ballot drop boxes, and acquire mail-in ballot equipment and supplies.

More than $6 million was doled out to officials in Fulton County, Georgia, and to five cities in Wisconsin, according to lawsuits filed this month. The funds were sent to facilitate violations of state law, the lawsuits allege.

The money was sent through agreements that had municipalities run elections in contravention to state law, according to the lawsuits, which were filed by the Thomas More Foundation’s Amistad Project. Accepting funding from a private group like the center is barred by state and federal law, the lawsuits allege.

“There is nothing in Wisconsin state law that allows cities and counties to take in millions of dollars sourced to an incredibly wealthy, interested, and partisan actor (i.e., Zuckerberg) in order to ‘assist’ those cities and counties in administering the vote,” the Wisconsin court filing states. Wisconsin election officials said on Friday that filing was full of “meritless legal arguments.”

In the Georgia filing, the Amistad Project says the unregulated private funds from the Center for Tech and Civic Life were used to pay “ballot harvesters,” deputize and pay political activists to manage ballots, and consolidate counting centers in the urban core “to facilitate the movement of hundreds of thousands of questionable ballots in secrecy without legally required bi-partisan observation.”

Provisional ballots are seen in a postal service
Provisional ballots are seen in a postal service tray at the Gwinnett County Board of Voter Registrations and Elections offices in Lawrenceville, Ga., on Nov. 7, 2020. (Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images)

Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, committed $400 million to the Center for Tech and Civic Life for the nonprofit to assist jurisdictions in running elections.

“Chan and Zuckerberg’s commitment will ensure that every qualified jurisdiction that applies will be approved for the funds they need to ensure that every eligible citizen can vote safely and have their vote counted,” a press release from the center stated last month.

The center was founded by former managers and staff at the New Organizing Institute, a progressive nonprofit that was training Democrat digital organizers. Neither the center nor Zuckerberg responded to requests for comment.

Zuckerberg and his company emerged as a powerful influence on the 2020 elections, The Epoch Times previously reported.

The money from Zuckerberg led to Democratic-strongholds in Pennsylvania taking steps to let voters “cure,” or fix, ballots that weren’t taken in Republican-dominated areas, creating a two-tiered election system, Amistad Project Director Phill Kline told The Epoch Times.

“Democrat strongholds with Zuckerberg money actually cured absentee ballots that were flawed, contrary to Pennsylvania law, while Republican strongholds refused to lie and in addition didn’t have the resources to cure ballots because they didn’t have Zuckerberg funding,” the former Kansas attorney general said.

The agreements between the Center for Tech and Civic Life and cities required cities to develop a plan for their elections and submit it to the center. According to an Aug. 21 agreement between the center and the city of Philadelphia obtained by The Epoch Times, the center agreed to pay $10 million to help the city run the general election amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The deal included a clause that allowed the center to discontinue or withhold part of, or request the return of all or part of any unspent grant funds if certain conditions were not met.

Philadelphia’s city commissioners didn’t respond to requests for comment. City Commissioner Al Schmidt said in a statement this week: “Despite the avalanche of meritless litigation and misinformation targeting our electoral system, I’m proud to say that the birthplace of our Republic held the most transparent and secure election in the history of Philadelphia.”

Election workers count ballots
Election workers count ballots in Philadelphia, Pa., on Nov. 4, 2020. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Ballot boxes funded by the center were densely placed in Delaware County but few were erected in the 59 counties that Trump won, Kline said. They also showed the consolidation of polling places in a way that disenfranchised Republican strongholds.

“That is a continued election system funded by Zuckerberg where Democrats have every opportunity to vote, including the illegal opportunities to vote. And in the Republican areas, it’s harder, because they closed down in-person polling and so forth. And it’s a violation of Bush v. Gore, it’s a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.”

Similar issues, including chain of custody concerns for the ballots placed into the drop boxes, arose in other states, according to Kline. For example, there were issues in Wayne County, Michigan that prompted two canvassing board members to hesitate to certify the election results.

The Amistad Project filed several cases months before the election, attempting to block the Center for Tech and Civic Life’s funneling of money from Zuckerberg to local and state governments. According to the project, some of the money also went to judges overseeing the election.

The lawsuits did not prompt judicial action prior to the election. They’re still being considered.

After those suits were filed, the center said in a statement that it is nonpartisan. “We are confident that these frivolous charges are without merit, and look forward to continuing this critical grant program in these unprecedented times,” it added.

Several weeks after the suits were filed, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, a Republican, warned officials across Louisiana not to accept funds from the Center for Tech and Civic Life.

Landry filed a suit “to prevent the injection of unregulated private money into the Louisiana election system and to protect the integrity of elections in the State by ensuring against the corrosive influence of outside money on Louisiana election officials,” according to the filing. It said the center had not appointed an agent for service of process in Louisiana but nevertheless engaged in business in the state in connection with the Nov. 3 elections.

“Whether the defendants here may be well-intentioned, private money in any amount, but particularly the amount of money offered by the defendants to select clerks and/or registrars, has an inherently insidious and corrupting effect,” Landry’s office said in the suit.

Another suit filed in Michigan last month accused Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, of allowing “partisan operatives” to interfere in the election by giving out funds for printing and distributing mail-in ballots and other efforts. The suit named the Center for Tech and Civic Life. The center called the litigation frivolous and said plaintiffs were “wasting election officials’ time at the voter’s expense, while also peddling misinformation.”
 
Back
Top