<div>
Ye, the embattled rap and fashion mogul formerly known as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/kanye-west" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Kanye West</a>, has agreed to buy conservative social media platform Parler, West and the company said in a joint statement Monday.
</div>
<div>
West has been engulfed in controversy in recent weeks after being suspended from Twitter and Instagram after making anti-Semitic statements. Taking over the platform will ensure the free exchange of opinions, he said.
</div>
<div>
“In a world where conservative opinions are considered to be controversial we have to make sure we have the right to freely express ourselves,” West said in the statement.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Parlement Technologies is pleased to announce that it has entered into an agreement in principle for Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, to acquire the Parler platform. The acquisition ensures Parler a future role in creating an uncancelable ecosystem where all voices are welcome. <a href="https://t.co/KXdhV71prl">pic.twitter.com/KXdhV71prl</a>
&mdash; Parler (@parler_social) <a href="https://twitter.com/parler_social/status/1581948432180449281?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 17, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
</div>
<div>
Terms of the deal were not disclosed, although the company <a href="https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/parler-completes-16m-series-b-acquires-private-cloud-infrastructure-company-to-become-key-infrastructure-player-with-major-us-footprint-301626087.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced Sunday</a> it had secured $16 million in funding and intended to buy Irvine, California-based cloud company Dynascale. The purchase would allow Parler to avoid reliance on Big Tech cloud services. The new funding brings to $56 million the total investment Parler has brought in, the company said.
</div>
<div>
George Farmer, CEO of Parler parent company Parlement Technologies and husband of The Daily Wire&#8217;s Candace Owens, said West’s investment “will change the world, and change the way the world thinks about free speech.”
</div>
<div>
“Ye is making a groundbreaking move into the free speech media space and will never have to fear being removed from social media again,” Farmer said in a statement. “Once again, Ye proves that he is one step ahead of the legacy media narrative. Parlement will be honored to help him achieve his goals.”
</div>
<div>
Farmer, the son of Michael Farmer, a British Conservative member of the upper chamber of the U.K. Parliament, was named CEO in May 2021. That move followed a battle between top shareholder Rebekah Mercer and former Parler CEO John Matze.
Owens and West are friends and generated headlines when they donned “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/candace-reveals-who-was-behind-white-lives-matter-shirts-meaning-of-the-statement" target="_blank" rel="noopener">White Lives Matter</a>” shirts earlier this month at a Paris fashion show.
</div>
<div>
West, who is reportedly worth $2 billion, most recently gave <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ye-west-turns-latest-interview-into-disturbing-anti-semitic-rant" target="_blank" rel="noopener">an interview</a> to a web TV show called Drink Champs in which he continued the tirade against Jews that got him locked out of his social media accounts, which have tens of millions of followers.
</div>
<div>
“What they do is, the Jewish community, especially in the music industry, … entertainment, period,  they’ll take one of us, the brightest of us, right, that could really feed a whole village,” West said in one of several disturbing remarks. “And they take and milk us until we die and then Stevie Wonder’s kid gotta get a job.”
</div>
<div>
Within the last month, it was announced that West has been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jpmorgan-chase-ends-its-banking-relationship-with-kanye-west" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dropped by JP Morgan Chase Bank</a>, severed ties with Gap, and may soon lose a lucrative partnership with Adidas.
</div>
<div>
Parler launched in 2018 as a conservative rival to Twitter. At least two other new platforms are attempting to fill the same void, former President Trump’s Truth Social and Gettr, a platform founded by former Trump advisor Jason Miller.
</div>
<div>
After Parler was criticized for being used by right-wing groups ahead of the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021, tech companies turned on it. Google and Apple stopped offering its app in their stores and Amazon Web Services shut off its cloud services. Apple and Google have both since reinstated the app in their stores.
</div>

Screen Shot 2022-10-16 at 2.35.29 PM

Embattled West Reaches Deal To Buy Social Media Platform Parler

Candace Owens

Kanye West

Parler

Social Media

Venture capitalists Peter Thiel and J.D. Vance, author of “Hillbilly Elegy,” are reportedly investing in Rumble, an alternative to YouTube that is popular among conservatives.
As The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-j-d-vance-invest-in-rumble-video-platform-popular-on-political-right-11621447661?mod=hp_lista_pos4">reported</a>, Narya Capital is the Cincinnati-based venture capital fund leading the investment. Narya was co-founded by Vance and Colin Greenspon, and by Thiel, who is also a Narya investor, “in a personal capacity.”
The amount of money in the deal was not shared, but a source familiar with the deal told the Journal that the investment was significant. Others close to the matter said it values Rumble at about $500 million.
The deal was finished last week and announced on Wednesday, Rumble Chief Executive Chris Pavlovski <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/technology/554406-peter-thiel-jd-vance-investing-in-youtube-alternative-popular-among?rl=1">told The Hill</a>.
“The purpose of the investment is to expand the rumble video platform and the service offerings for it. Allow us to go after different markets and expand into other markets,” especially non-English based markets, Pavlovski said, per the outlet.
“The second component of that is to invest in the cloud infrastructure and offer cloud solutions to businesses. We&#8217;ll be competing against other cloud services out there like Amazon Web Services and others. We’ll be competing in that space in the near future,” Pavlovski added.
Rumble is a social media platform that has gained attention from conservatives as left-leaning sites crack down on free speech in a discriminatory manner that excludes those who disagree with them. According to the Journal, Rumble was founded in 2013 as a platform for sharing light-hearted content, like videos of pets. Last fall, however, its popularity increased and it grew in monthly visits from 800,000 in August to 25 million in October, according to SimilarWeb.
“I&#8217;m really hoping that the market can look at us as viable competition,” Pavlovski <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/technology/554406-peter-thiel-jd-vance-investing-in-youtube-alternative-popular-among?rl=1">said</a>. “I&#8217;m hoping this investment will show that there can be competition, and we intend to compete, in a space controlled by very few companies.”
Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) and conservative Dan Bongino amplified Rumble and described it as a place that was more open to free speech than YouTube and Facebook. Big Tech has cracked down on viewpoints opposing the Left over the past several years, raising concerns amongst conservatives that they will be silenced. Parler, a conservative alternative to Twitter, was notably kicked off of multiple platforms earlier this year, including the Apple App Store.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/apple-approves-returning-parler-to-app-store">On March 31,</a> Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) sent a <a href="https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/2868b301-dea4-455f-ba5f-a8e567e7ac17/letter-from-rep.-buck-and-sen.-lee-re-parler-21-1-.pdf">letter</a> to the heads of Google, Apple, and Amazon, asking them to clarify specific questions that the legislators had regarding the action taken against the Parler social network.
In the <a href="https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/2868b301-dea4-455f-ba5f-a8e567e7ac17/letter-from-rep.-buck-and-sen.-lee-re-parler-21-1-.pdf">letter</a>, the lawmakers said:
<blockquote>
In just three days, Apple and Google effectively cut off Parler’s primary distribution channel, and Amazon cut off Parler’s access to critical computing services, leaving the company completely unable to serve its 15 million users. These actions were against a company that is not alleged to have violated any law. In fact, information provided by Parler to the House Oversight Committee revealed that Parler was assisting law enforcement even in advance of January 6th.
</blockquote>
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/apple-approves-returning-parler-to-app-store">Last month</a>, Apple approved Parler’s return to the App Store.
In February, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/social-media-app-parler-resumes-after-finding-new-computer-servers">The Daily Wire reported</a> that Parler had attained new computer servers and continued its operations after being effectively shut down by several of the big tech companies in January.
The Daily Wire reported:
<blockquote>
“We are off of the big tech platform, so that we can consider ourselves safe and secure for the future,” Parler CEO Mark Meckler said in an interview with Just The News.
Meckler said the platform will employ artificial intelligence and “human editors to police for illegal speech that violates its service agreement but otherwise is remaining true to its free speech, no censorship roots,” the site said.
</blockquote>

6123F126-3BFA-4FFC-88FC-960B9B78B4BB_1_201_a

J.D. Vance, Peter Thiel Invest In Free-Speech YouTube Alternative Called Rumble

Big Tech

Free Speech

JD Vance

YouTube

On Monday, Apple wrote a letter to Republicans on the House and Senate antitrust subcommittees saying that the social media app, Parler, will be able to return to the App Store after the app made adjustments determined to be suitable for Apple.
On March 31, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) sent a <a href="https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/2868b301-dea4-455f-ba5f-a8e567e7ac17/letter-from-rep.-buck-and-sen.-lee-re-parler-21-1-.pdf">letter</a> to the heads of Google, Apple, and Amazon, asking them to clarify specific questions that the legislators had regarding the action taken against the Parler social network.
In the <a href="https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/2868b301-dea4-455f-ba5f-a8e567e7ac17/letter-from-rep.-buck-and-sen.-lee-re-parler-21-1-.pdf">letter</a>, the lawmakers said:
<blockquote>In just three days, Apple and Google effectively cut off Parler’s primary distribution channel, and Amazon cut off Parler’s access to critical computing services, leaving the company completely unable to serve its 15 million users. These actions were against a company that is not alleged to have violated any law. In fact, information provided by Parler to the House Oversight Committee revealed that Parler was assisting law enforcement even in advance of January 6th. </blockquote>
The lawmakers went on to ask a range of questions regarding how companies decide on such actions when reviewing a specific platform.
In February, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/social-media-app-parler-resumes-after-finding-new-computer-servers">The Daily Wire reported</a> that Parler had attained new computer servers and continued its operations after being shut down by several of the big tech companies in January.
The Daily Wire reported:
<blockquote>“We are off of the big tech platform, so that we can consider ourselves safe and secure for the future,” Parler CEO Mark Meckler said in an interview with Just The News.
Meckler said the platform will employ artificial intelligence and “human editors to police for illegal speech that violates its service agreement but otherwise is remaining true to its free speech, no censorship roots,” the site said.</blockquote>
On Monday, Lee and Buck received a <a href="https://twitter.com/RepKenBuck/status/1384159186209054721?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1384159186209054721%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fpolicy%2Ftechnology%2F548983-apple-approves-parlers-return-to-app-store">response</a> from Timothy Powderly, the senior director of government affairs for the Americas at Apple. The <a href="https://twitter.com/RepKenBuck/status/1384159186209054721?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1384159186209054721%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fpolicy%2Ftechnology%2F548983-apple-approves-parlers-return-to-app-store">letter</a> answered specific questions that were raised by the lawmakers.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
On March 31, <a href="https://twitter.com/SenMikeLee?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenMikeLee</a> and I sent a letter demanding answers about why Apple removed Parler from the App Store.
🚨Today, we received a response: Parler will be reinstated on the App Store. Huge win for free speech. <a href="https://t.co/FQBDSSSFGk">pic.twitter.com/FQBDSSSFGk</a>
&mdash; Rep. Ken Buck (@RepKenBuck) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepKenBuck/status/1384159186209054721?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 19, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Regarding its content policy, Apple stated that it &#8220;wants to provide a safe experience for users to get apps and a great opportunity for all developers to be successful. Apple does this in part by curating the App Store, including by reviewing apps to ensure compliance with all App Store Review Guidelines, which among other things set for standards for privacy safety, security, and performance of apps in the App Store.&#8221;
Regarding the review process, Apple explained, among other items, that the company &#8220;reviews more than 100,000 submissions per week, and Apple rejects about 40% of them due to various Guidelines compliance issues.&#8221;
Specifically addressing the Parler app, Apple&#8217;s letter stated that the company &#8220;has in the past communicated with Parler regarding failures in its content moderation efforts, as well as its desire stated at various times to not moderate content at all.&#8221; The letter went on to provide details about Apple&#8217;s guidelines that state &#8220;that apps should not include offensive or discriminatory content, including that which is likely to humiliate, intimidate, or harm a targeted individual or group.&#8221; Apple also requires apps &#8220;with user-generated content to include the following features to prevent abuse:
<ul>
<li>a method for filtering objectionable material from being posted to the app;</li>
<li>a mechanism to report offensive content and timely responses to concerns;</li>
<li>the ability to block abusive users from the service; and </li>
<li>published contact information so users can easily reach the developer.&#8221;</li>
</ul>
Apple found that Parler was in violation of some of their guidelines requiring content moderation. On January 8, Apple told Parler to remove certain content, along with similar content, and to respond to Apple within 24 hours. Parler &#8220;did not communicate a sufficient plan to improve its moderation of user-generated content in the app,&#8221; so it was removed from the App Store.
Since then, Apple explained that it has had many conversations with Parler in order to get the app up to compliance with its guidelines. As of April 14, Parler has been approved to be reinstated to the App Store. The company said that it is anticipating that the new Parler app will be immediately available as soon as Parler releases it.
Apple also said that it &#8220;did not coordinate or otherwise consult with Google or Amazon&#8221; regarding its decision to remove Parler from the App Store because of its failure to comply with their guidelines and that the company stands by its decision to do so.

CCF74817-3B5E-4B79-BB4B-E768F2D4AA1A_1_201_a

Apple Approves Returning Parler To App Store

Apple

Parler, the social media platform popular with right-wing users, worked with the FBI to target accounts suspected of encouraging violence prior to the January riot at the Capitol, making more than 50 referrals leading up to the violence, the company said Thursday.
In a letter to House Oversight Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Parler accused &#8220;Big Tech&#8221; of waging a &#8220;coordinated and widespread disinformation campaign&#8221; against the platform intended to &#8220;scapegoat&#8221; it for the deadly riot.
&#8220;Far from being the far-right instigator and rogue company that Big Tech has portrayed Parler to be, the facts conclusively demonstrate that Parler has been a responsible and law-abiding company focused on ensuring that only free and lawful speech exists on its platform,&#8221; Parler&#8217;s attorneys Michael S. Dry and Ephraim “Fry” Wernick wrote in the letter.
From December to the weeks leading up to the Capitol riot, Parler fostered a working relationship with the FBI and alerted the agency to many posts that appeared to encourage or plan violence, according to emails and other documents obtained by The Daily Wire.
Some of the posts called for killing government officials and their families, including one from a user who said he would kill President Biden. Another user called for &#8220;not just a peaceful march&#8221; on January 6 in Washington, saying &#8220;I want to start eliminating people.&#8221; Yet another lengthier post called for an &#8220;armed force&#8221; of 150,000 &#8220;American Patriots&#8221; to be &#8220;prepared to react to the congressional events of January 6th.&#8221;
&#8220;Concerned about Wednesday&#8230;&#8221; read one message from Parler to the FBI, referring to January 6, when Congress was scheduled to convene to confirm President Biden’s election victory.
While most of the posts Parler brought to the FBI&#8217;s attention appear to be from right-wing users, one of the posts came from a user who appeared to offer bounties for the killing of Trump family members and members of the far-right group the Proud Boys.
&#8220;See a trump, [skull and coffin emojis] a trump. Freedom riders take notice. Pays 80k-1M depending on which trump it is,&#8221; the post read. &#8220;5k for anyone with proud boy tattoo.&#8221;
In one email, an individual from the FBI thanked Parler for its efforts and apologized for making a redundant emergency disclosure request on a specific Parler user.
&#8220;It appears that you have already sent the FBI subscriber results for this user. I sincerely apologize to bombard you with unnecessary emails, as you are already so busy!!&#8221; the email stated. &#8220;We appreciate all that you are doing and I&#8217;m greatly sorry.&#8221;
Since the riot, FBI officials have said they received no specific, credible threats beforehand about potential violence at the Capitol on January 6. FBI Director Christopher Wray told NPR last week that his agency had directed all of its field offices beforehand to be on the lookout for information related to any threats.
“What we did not have, as far as I can tell, is any indication that hundreds and hundreds of people were going to breach the U.S. Capitol,” Wray <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/03/18/978193998/were-going-to-keep-digging-fbi-director-wray-says-of-capitol-siege">said</a>.
Despite the platform&#8217;s coordination with the FBI, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee took aim at Parler in the wake of the violence, opening an investigation into Parler and its connection to the riot. Last month, the committee demanded documents and information related to Parler’s financing and potential ties to foreign entities.
Meanwhile, Facebook came under scrutiny from watchdog groups for questionable activity on its much larger platform leading up to the riot. Some even accused the mammoth social media company of bearing much more of the blame for the violence that unfolded at the Capitol.
&#8220;If you took Parler out of the equation, you would still almost certainly have what happened at the Capitol,&#8221; Angelo Carusone, president and CEO of watchdog Media Matters, <a href="https://www.salon.com/2021/01/16/despite-parler-backlash-facebook-played-huge-role-in-fueling-capitol-riot-watchdogs-say/">told</a> Salon in the days following the riot. &#8220;If you took Facebook out of the equation before that, you would not. To me, when Apple and Google sent their letter to Parler, I was a little bit confused why Facebook didn&#8217;t get one.&#8221;
By the Saturday morning three days after the riot, Parler had risen to the number one slot in Apple&#8217;s App Store, less than 24 hours after Twitter permanently suspended former President Trump&#8217;s personal account from its platform.
Parler&#8217;s fortunes quickly reversed, however. By the next day, the company&#8217;s future was in doubt after Apple and Google removed Parler&#8217;s mobile app from their app stores and Amazon informed the platform that it was booting Parler from its web-hosting service over its alleged failure to implement an acceptable content moderation policy.
Parler went offline that Sunday, January 10, and remained unavailable for over a month until February 15, when the company announced it was relaunching its site and was back online using “robust, sustainable, independent technology.”
In the company&#8217;s letter to the oversight committee, Parler also attempted to put to bed several other accusations against the company, saying that it has always been American-owned and has never engaged in any collusion with &#8220;the Russians.&#8221; The company also denied ever offering former President Trump an ownership interest in Parler.
Parler added that it &#8220;has always recognized that there are legal limitations on free speech&#8221; and called on Congress to investigate the actions that the larger tech companies took against Parler in the days following the Capitol riot.

Parler Worked With FBI To Target Threats Prior To Capitol Riot, Company Says

Capitol Riot

Parler, a social media app that was shut down last month by tech giants, said Monday that it has secured new computer servers and resumed operations.
“We are off of the big tech platform, so that we can consider ourselves safe and secure for the future,” Parler CEO Mark Meckler said in an interview with <a href="https://justthenews.com/nation/culture/welcome-back-parler-resumes-social-media-app-after-securing-new-computer-servers?utm_source=justthenews.com&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=external-news-aggregators">Just The News</a>.
Meckler said the platform will employ artificial intelligence and &#8220;human editors to police for illegal speech that violates its service agreement but otherwise is remaining true to its free speech, no censorship roots,&#8221; the site said.
Dan Bongino, a prominent Parler user and shareholder, applauded the move, saying, &#8220;Cancel culture came for us, and hit us with all they had. Yet we couldn’t be kept down. We’re back, and we’re ready to resume the struggle for freedom of expression, data sovereignty, and civil discourse. We thank our users for their loyalty during this incredibly challenging time.&#8221;
On Jan. 11, the social media platform, which is used by many right-leaning voices since its founding in 2018, went dark as Amazon banned the site from its cloud hosting service.
“Amazon suspended Parler from its Amazon Web Services (AWS) unit, for violating AWS’s terms of services by failing to effectively deal with a steady increase in violent content, according to an email by an AWS Trust and Safety team to Parler, seen by Reuters,” the news agency <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-parler/apple-amazon-suspend-parler-social-network-from-app-store-and-web-hosting-service-idUSKBN29F00O">reported</a>. “An Amazon spokesperson confirmed the letter was authentic.”
Amazon said Parler presented a “very real risk to public safety.”
Parler has been hit from all sides as top tech companies seek to shut it down. Google suspended the site from its app store Friday, saying Parler had failed to moderate “egregious content” posted by users.
Apple also removed the site from its app store.
“We have suspended Parler from the App Store until they resolve these issues,” Apple said in a statement Saturday. Apple had given Parler 24 hours to submit a detailed plan to moderate its content, claiming that users used the service to coordinate Wednesday’s riot at the U.S. Capitol.
Then-CEO John Matze ripped Amazon, Google, and Apple, saying the tech giants coordinated to shut down conservatives. Twitter last week permanently suspended then-President Donald Trump from the platform, saying he had violated its terms.
“This was a coordinated attack by the tech giants to kill competition in the market place… You can expect the war on competition and free speech to continue, but don’t count us out,” Matze said in a post on Parler after big tech pulled the plug. “There is the possibility Parler will be unavailable on internet for up to a week as we rebuild from scratch.”
Shortly before the site went dark, Matze said that the tech companies “all worked together to make sure at the same time we would lose access to, not only our apps, but they’re also shutting all of our servers off tonight, off the Internet. They made an attempt to not only kill the apps, but also destroy the entire company. And it’s not just these three companies, every vendor from text message services, to email providers, to our lawyers, all ditched us, too, on the same day.”
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/social-media-platform-parler-goes-dark-as-amazon-suspends-service">Social Media Platform Parler Goes Dark As Amazon Suspends Service</a>

US-IT-LIFESTYLE-MEDIA-POLITICS-PARLER

Social Media App Parler Resumes After Finding New Computer Servers

The Democrat who serves as the chair of the House Oversight Committee has written social-media platform Parler stating that the Committee is demanding that the company reveal its investors and creditors.
On Monday, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/2021-02-08.CBM%20to%20Wernick%20-Parler%20re%20Negotiations.pdf">wrote a letter</a> to Parler’s COO, Jeffrey Wernick, stating, “In the weeks leading up to the assault on the Capitol on January 6, Parler users actively took to the platform to call for violence and even ‘civil war.’ A recent analysis by USA Today shows a strong connection between President Trump’s speech at the January 6 rally and a significant uptick in calls for violence on Parler. Immediately after President Trump exhorted his supporters to ‘show strength’ during his speech, the term ‘civil war’ surged into one of the top five most frequently used terms on Parler. One user wrote, ‘Be men fight back and f*** them up. Civil war is upon us.’”
Citing “numerous Parler users” who have been “arrested and charged for their roles,” and claiming, “Parler reportedly allowed Russian disinformation to flourish on its platform prior to the November 2020 election,” Maloney continued: “Individuals with ties to the January 6 assault should not — and must not — be allowed to hide behind the veil of anonymity provided by shell companies. In addition, according to a recent press report, the ‘Trump Organization negotiated on behalf of then-president Donald Trump to make Parler his primary social network, but it had a condition: an ownership stake in return for joining.’ These negotiations reportedly occurred while President Trump was still in office, which experts have warned raise legal concerns regarding anti-bribery laws.”
Maloney then wrote that the committee wanted:
<ol>
<li>A capitalization table showing individuals and entities with direct or indirect ownership interests in Parler, and a shareholder register maintained by you or any third-party on your behalf;</li>
<li>A list of all individuals and entities who have or had any control over Parler;</li>
<li>A list of Parler’s creditors which hold or held a debt of at least $10,000, including the type of debt funding, amount owed, maturity, and applicable interest rate;</li>
<li>All agreements, including but not limited to consulting, service, or business agreements, that Parler has with any Russian individual or entity;</li>
<li>All documents and communications referring or relating to proposed or completed financing, gifts, or investment in Parler directly or indirectly by any Russian individual or entity; and</li>
<li>All documents and communications referring to relating to a proposal to provide President Donald Trump with an ownership stake in Parler.</li>
</ol>
In January, Parler was removed from App stores hosted by Apple and Google. Amazon’s cloud services division removed Parler soon after that.
“Parler said it had acquired more than 12 million users by the close of the year. But the list never grew to include the former president, who was reportedly dissuaded from joining before the election by aides, including son-in-law Jared Kushner and Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino,” <a href="https://www.mediaite.com/news/house-democrats-demand-parler-hand-over-list-of-investors-creditors/">Mediaite</a> reported.

Parler CEO Says Platform Protects User Data And Speech

Democrats Demand Parler Reveal Its Investors And Creditors

Democratic Party

Investors

In the weeks that followed November’s general election, Parler, the social media platform founded in 2018 by engineers John Matze and Jared Thomson, was steadily gaining momentum as it rose to the top of Apple’s App Store.
In a social media landscape saturated with left-leaning ideologues, Parler billed itself as a free speech microblogging platform, free of any political bias or censorship. This laissez-faire approach to social networking resonated with many, especially amid the increase of seemingly biased &#8220;fact checks&#8221; on political content. Within days of Twitter’s glaring foray into fact-checking, Parler reached over 850,000 daily downloads. Overtaking such giants as TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook, Parler climbed to the top spot of the App Store downloads chart.
It didn’t take long for the Silicon Valley titans to strike back. Framing the January 6 Capitol Hill riots as partially the fault of open and uncensored platforms like Parler — specifically due to their lack of active content filtering — both <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/johnpaczkowski/amazon-parler-aws?bftwnews&amp;utm_term=4ldqpgc#4ldqpgc">Apple and Google</a> banned Parler from being offered or downloaded on their respective app stores. The final nail in the coffin came when Amazon evicted Parler from its Web Services (AWS) platform on January 11, effectively shutting down the entire website.
Parler has been down since Amazon Web Services (AWS) expelled the platform from its cloud servers. Parler’s website is now a static page bearing a message from the firm’s founder and former CEO, John Matze: “Now seems like the right time to remind you all — both lovers and haters — why we started this platform. We believe privacy is paramount and free speech essential, especially on social media. Our aim has always been to provide a nonpartisan public square where individuals can enjoy and exercise their rights to both. We will resolve any challenge before us and plan to welcome all of you back soon. We will not let civil discourse perish!” Despite being abruptly evicted from Amazon’s AWS cloud services, Matze assured users that their data had been recovered from Amazon and would ensure a smooth relaunch and rebuild.  
Echoing a similar sentiment, Don Bongino explained to me that Parler’s engineers and design team had been working around the clock to rebuild and strengthen the app’s technology infrastructure, making it far more resilient to the whims of Silicon Valley’s gatekeepers.
Meanwhile, Parler is currently <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/parler-sues-amazon-antitrust-contract-breach">claiming</a> an antitrust violation and breach of contract, suing Amazon for severing its ties with the platform, citing political animus as the tech giant’s impetus. 
Since my last interview with Bongino, much has changed in the social media landscape. President Donald Trump, along with hundreds of thousands of other accounts, have been suspended and purged from Twitter. Parler, the free-speech alternative platform, has itself been evicted from Amazon’s cloud servers and the myriad of services it relied on it run. 
I asked Bongino, as Parler’s strategic advisor, to elucidate on his vision for the future of Parler and similarly aligned free-speech platforms more broadly. “All of our warnings about where we were going is where we are now. Growing authoritarianism, the slippery slope. Everything we said is now happening. The world’s upside down. Imbeciles on the left continue to insist that the misinformation is coming for the conservatives.”
Offering a bleak outlook on the trajectory of the tech industry, Bongino added, “when it comes to this authoritarianism and totalitarianism, I don’t see it getting better. The Parler example was absolutely grotesque from someone who’s seen it. However awful you think it was from the exterior — a coordinated attack from the biggest tech companies — it was worse on the inside. We warned everyone about this.” 
Bongino mentioned Matt Taibbi and Glenn Greenwald amongst a sparsely populated cadre of leftists who abide by liberal, democratic values. But regarding the majority, Bongino said, “they don’t see authoritarianism and the weaponization of government and the use of the free market — the alleged free market — against their competitors as a problem at all.”
Specifically, on the future of Parler and its awaited return to the web, Bongino was optimistic. “Maybe I’m a pessimist in the short run, but not in the log run. This quest by the left to be tyrants is like holding a beachball underwater. People’s desire to be free of censorship is always going to pop up over the water. They can’t keep doing this forever. 
&#8220;In the short run they’ve had some successes. They took down Parler for a month, maybe a month and a half by the time we are back. And we will be back. And these people won’t have anything to boycott. We’ve made enormous investments and being resilient.&#8221;
&#8220;We could have been back up in a week, but we wanted to take our time. We will be back. That’s a 100%. But we want to do it right. We learned a lot of lessons from this. It’s like a football game. We had a plan, but it took a few hits for us to learn what we were doing wrong. We’ve learned our lesson and we are building the most cancel-culture free, the most robust social media network. When it comes back its going to be resilient to all of this.” 
On the contentious issue of government and its role in the regulation of internet and tech companies, Bongino explained that indirectly, the government already does this. “There is already a bigger role of government. There is significant precedent for cases where the government has used private actors to do things to people that the government can’t do itself. There was an Alabama case,” Bongino says, referring to the 1946 Supreme Court <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/08/facebook-censors-science-journalism-removes-pro-gmo-page/">ruling</a> on Marsh v. Alabama, in which the court ruled that a private space that is open to the public must also uphold public rights. Bongino added, “the government can’t destroy our right to free speech. The government can get a private company to do this on their behalf.” 
Further prodding on the broad issue of government regulation in technology, I asked Bongino to expound on the much-maligned Communications Decency Act of 1996 — specifically, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/understanding-section-230-everything-you-need-to-know/">Section 230</a>. “Section 230 is a total joke at this point. It’s ‘Law in Name Only.’ The provision that allows sites to censor conservatives has to be replaced with an Internet Bill of Rights. It is incumbent upon a government who is supposed to represent all of us to represent us fairly. If we don’t get some sort of Internet Bill of Rights, the internet will cleave in half. There will be a free speech internet, and a soviet-style censored internet.”
Having firsthand experience bracing the brunt of monopolistic Silicon Valley tech firms, Bongino offered advise to budding entrepreneurs. “It is incumbent upon you to review every contract you have; get every vendor you have, and cancel them before they cancel you if you don’t think they are committed to free speech and protecting your rights. Get away from those companies. There are actual free speech companies out there you can use. You have to find companies that believe in free speech and are willing to give everyone the middle finger.”
Bongino added, “This stuff takes time. It took Fox News over 10 years before they started to turn a profit. Not every one of these places is going to be an overnight success. Everything is going to be a prolonged and tough slog. But in the end, there are massive dividends and rewards to be paid. The Regan revolution lasted eight years; but it took the dreaded 60s and the entire 70s to finally bring about.”
With his sights fervently set on Parler’s ensuing return, Bongino’s message to Amazon is, “we’ll see you guys in court. We will go bankrupt and destitute before we let this go. I have a platform and I won’t stop talking about this. To any company that decides to do this, we are going to use every communications vehicle at our disposal to make sure that people are warned. Over time people will look back and ask what happened? And that’s what happened: you turned into Soviets.” 
Follow Harry Khachatrian on <a href="https://twitter.com/Harry1T6">Twitter</a>
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

EXCLUSIVE: Dan Bongino on the Future of Parler and Government’s Role in Tech

Amazon

Dan Bongino

Google

Readers Pass

Social Media Censorship

Speaking with Sean Hannity on Fox News, Parler co-owner Dan Bongino said that the social media platform could resume running again early next week.
“We’re shooting for Monday,” <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/tech/dan-bongino-monday-looks-good-parler-back">said</a> Bongino. “Monday looks good. Fingers crossed.”
On January 11, Amazon <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/social-media-platform-parler-goes-dark-as-amazon-suspends-service">banned</a> the social media platform Parler from its cloud hosting service. Amazon said that Parler presented a “very real risk to public safety,” with Reuters <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/social-media-platform-parler-goes-dark-as-amazon-suspends-service">reporting</a>, “Amazon suspended Parler from its Amazon Web Services (AWS) unit, for violating AWS’s terms of services by failing to effectively deal with a steady increase in violent content, according to an email by an AWS Trust and Safety team to Parler.”
This came soon after Parler was also removed from Apple and Google’s app stores, who cited similar concerns regarding the moderation of content. Then-CEO John Matze <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/parler-not-working-offline-down-big-tech-amazon-web-services">told</a> Fox News that the site will try to “get back online as quickly as possible,” and described the decision by Apple, Google and Amazon as a “coordinated attack by the tech giants to kill competition in the market place.”
Soon after, Parler filed a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/parler-sues-amazon-after-being-suspended">lawsuit</a> against Amazon, “claiming that Amazon’s suspension of Parler violated antitrust laws and breached the contract between the two entities.”
Earlier this week, John Matze announced in a memo sent to employees that he was terminated by the Parler board, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/parler-ceo-john-matze-tells-employees-that-he-was-terminated-by-board-the-future-of-parler-is-no-longer-in-my-hands">saying</a> “Over the past few months, I’ve met constant resistance to my product vision, my strong belief in free speech and my view of how the Parler site should be managed.”
After Matze’s announcement, Bongino “disputed” his claims.
“I have no personal gripe against John, the CEO, at all; I want to be crystal clear,” Bongino said in a Facebook video on Wednesday, “but John decided to make this public, not us. We were handling it like gentlemen.”
“We were the ones, in fact, fighting to get Parler back up. There was some really bad decisions made from people on the inside, and listen, this isn’t us airing dirty laundry,” Bongino continued. “This is protecting a company that is absolutely committed to free speech, that I put the last year of my life into. Do you actually believe that someone else was on the side of free speech?&#8221;
Later, Bongino emphasized that the “relationship with Parler and the CEO did not work out because the CEO’s vision was not ours.”
“Our vision was crystal clear. We needed to get up and fight back, some terrible decisions were made in the past, that led us to getting put down by Amazon and others,” Bongino added.
Unsurprisingly, the issue of content moderation and free speech remained central to Bongino’s statements.
“We could have been (back) up in a week if we just would have bent the knee and followed all the ridiculous Apple edicts to become a heavy moderation site to the left of Twitter. That&#8217;s not what we&#8217;re gonna do. &#8230; We were a free speech site and will remain as such and that&#8217;s why it’s taken so long to get back up,” Bongino <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/parler-ceo-john-matze-fired/">told</a> viewers.

‘Fingers Crossed’: Dan Bongino Says ‘Monday Looks Good’ For Parler’s Return

Censorship

Social media platform Parler has terminated CEO John Matze, according to a memo sent by Matze to staffers and obtained by Fox News.
“On January 29, 2021, the Parler board controlled by Rebekah Mercer decided to immediately terminate my position as CEO of Parler. I did not participate in this decision,” the <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/parler-ceo-john-matze-says-hes-been-terminated-by-board-i-did-not-participate-in-this-decision#">memo</a> read. “I understand that those who now control the company have made some communications to employees and other third parties that have unfortunately created confusion and prompted me to make this public statement.”
“Over the past few months, I’ve met constant resistance to my product vision, my strong belief in free speech and my view of how the Parler site should be managed,” Matze continued. “For example, I advocated for more product stability and what I believe is a more effective approach to content moderation.”
The subject of content moderation was allegedly central to the decision of Amazon Web Services and other providers to effectively remove Parler from the Internet.
“I have worked endless hours and fought constant battles to get the Parler site running but at this point, the future of Parler is no longer in my hands,” Matze wrote. “I want to thank the Parler employees, the people on Parler and Parler supporters for their tireless work and devotion to the company. They are an amazing group of diverse, hardworking and talented individuals and I have the utmost respect for them. Many of them have become my second family.”
Parler has been shut down since Amazon Web Services announced that they would <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/social-media-platform-parler-goes-dark-as-amazon-suspends-service">suspend</a> hosting for the social network in early January. Soon after, Parler filed a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/parler-sues-amazon-after-being-suspended">lawsuit</a> against Amazon, “claiming that Amazon’s suspension of Parler violated antitrust laws and breached the contract between the two entities.” At the time, Matze <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/parler-not-working-offline-down-big-tech-amazon-web-services">told</a> Fox News that the site would try to “get back online as quickly as possible,” but warned that the platform could be down for as long as a week.
Matze concluded by thanking those who supported him and the platform, describing the experience as the “true American Dream.”
“After that, I’ll be looking for new opportunities where my technical acumen, vision and the causes I am passionate about will be required and respected,” Matze wrote. “I want to thank all the people of Parler that supported me and the platform. This has been the true American Dream: an idea from a living room to a company of considerable value. I’m not saying goodbye, just so long for now.”

Parler CEO John Matze Tells Employees That He Was Terminated By Board: ‘The Future Of Parler Is No Longer In My Hands’

House Oversight and Reform Committee chair Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) reportedly sent a letter to acting FBI Director Christopher Wray this week demanding that the agency conduct a &#8220;robust examination&#8221; into Twitter alternative Parler.
Democrats, looking to tie the company to a January 6th riot at the United States Capitol that left five dead and dozens injured, now want to know whether Parler, which only recently relaunched, at least partly, after being booted from Amazon&#8217;s web servers, is being bankrolled by a hostile foreign government.
No other social media platform is set for scrutiny, according to Maloney&#8217;s letter, even though both Twitter and Facebook, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/18/tech/facebook-posts-promoting-violence/index.html">as CNN notes</a>, are still playing host to &#8220;posts promoting violence during inauguration week.&#8221;
&#8220;The chairwoman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee on Thursday asked the FBI to conduct a &#8216;robust examination&#8217; of the alleged role in the Jan. 6 Capitol siege of Parler, the now-disabled social media site that bristled with violent chatter before and after rioters stormed the Capitol in a rampage,&#8221; <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/21/parler-fbi-russia-jan-6-capitol/">The Washington Post reported Thursday</a>.
&#8220;Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), the chairwoman, said the request is a step toward opening a formal committee investigation into sites that may encourage violence, including Parler,&#8221; the outlet continued. &#8220;It became prominent last year as a freewheeling alternative to Twitter, gaining popularity in particular among conservatives.&#8221;
Maloney is particularly concerned about Parler&#8217;s new hosting services and its &#8220;alleged ties to Russia,&#8221; the country Democrats insisted had compromised the 2016 election by improperly collaborating with the Trump 2016 presidential campaign &#8212; an allegation that the Trump campaign denies, and for which Democrats produced no evidence, despite a two-year-long special counsel investigation.
“I am going to get to the bottom of who owns and funds social media platforms like Parler that condone and create violence,” she said.
CNN and other legacy media networks have pointed out that Parler was not the only platform used to organize the events of January 6th, and both Facebook and Twitter appear to have played host to groups and conversations promoting the idea that Democrats had engaged in a national vote fraud campaign to undermine the 2020 presidential election.
Additionally, its possible Maloney may not have the authority to do more than question Parler, given that, as The Washington Post points out, the social media platform is protected under Section 230, the same Federal provision that largely absolves Twitter and Facebook of liability for user-generated content.
&#8220;Congress has wide-ranging authority to inquire about private companies, but Parler and other social media sites also enjoy broad legal immunity for what others post on their platforms through Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act,&#8221; the outlet says. &#8220;While there is ample evidence of hateful conversation ahead of the attack on the Capitol and calls for violence against members of Congress, those were made by Parler’s users — many of them using pseudonyms — a fact limiting Parler’s responsibility for them.&#8221;

House Oversight Chair Wants A ‘Robust Examination’ Of Twitter Alternative Parler

Russia

Twitter

In 2017, Google was sued by the family of Nohemi Gonzalez, a 26-year-old American student studying abroad, who was tragically murdered in the 2015 ISIS Paris attacks that killed 130 innocent people. The terrorists used Google’s YouTube service to actively recruit, plan, incite, and even give instructions for the terror attacks. Incredibly, Google conceded all of these facts but argued — successfully — that it should not be held liable because of protections provided to social media companies under <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1611170628796000&amp;usg=AFQjCNF78QiD7ozeqHgs-0I9uzr8ntTe7g">The Communications Decency Act</a> (47 USC 230 or “Section 230”).
The court agreed with Google, finding that it was protected under Section 230, as it was not the “publisher” and didn’t create or contribute to the harmful material disseminated. While controversial, Section 230 is clear: an “internet service provider” such as a social media company, is not required to moderate content and cannot be held liable for 3rd parties who post legally problematic or even dangerous material. In other words, social media companies are permitted to simply be loudspeakers, telephones, headphones, and public squares.  They may exist solely to deliver other people’s content without interference and without fear of legal action.
Section 230 has not changed since 2017, but Google’s mercurial positions certainly have. Most recently, President Trump <a href="https://slate.com/technology/2021/01/twitter-ban-donald-trump-byeeeee.html" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://slate.com/technology/2021/01/twitter-ban-donald-trump-byeeeee.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1611170628796000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGPmKnq4rf7pEr5VLn6qf9X-Tz2lQ">was banned</a> from Twitter for “<a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/01/trump-ballistic-twitter-ban-creating-own-platform.html" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/01/trump-ballistic-twitter-ban-creating-own-platform.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1611170628796000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGdZ2jnVZxPDvxP4MuOUuTHSKQ0BQ">incitement of violence</a>” related to the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-capitol-siege/2021/01/09/e3ad3274-5283-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-capitol-siege/2021/01/09/e3ad3274-5283-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1611170628796000&amp;usg=AFQjCNECfARV5x2JIeJJEv8PbUfSffodFw">riots and siege</a> of the US Capitol building. Shortly thereafter, Google removed social media app Parler from its application server. In a stunning and irreconcilable shift from its court position of 2017, Google <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/01/google-removes-parler-app-store-apple.html" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/01/google-removes-parler-app-store-apple.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1611170628796000&amp;usg=AFQjCNH_aqjFfa1p7F6YEpkV0TxmnR4v0g">explained</a> that the company “require[s] that apps implement robust moderation for egregious content.” Indeed, it is clear that Google has modified its content policies and has banned many terror-affiliated accounts since the 2017 lawsuit, but it nevertheless maintains its legal position that it committed no wrongdoing in simply allowing third parties to post incitement of violence on its platform. Google has not paid a dime nor admitted any liability to the Gonzalez family for Nohemi’s death.
Now, after effectively using Section 230 as a shield against liability, Google wields it as a sword against Parler, arguing that Parler somehow does not enjoy the same statutory protections of Section 230 that Google relied and still relies upon. In other words, Google appears to now be taking the position that its internal policies related to community standards and/or content moderation somehow supersede the statute that permits Parler to allow 3rd party posts without modification or censorship and without fear of legal action. Google now says that Section 230’s protections, allowing internet services like Parler simply to act as a public square, can be retroactively “repealed” by that all-powerful private company’s policies.  Congressional legislation-be-damned.
Google cannot have it both ways. Either Google is not liable for ISIS’ incitement on YouTube, and neither is Parler liable for incitement by 3rd parties on its site, or both are liable.
But if something does not feel right about Google now saying that it can require Parler to take editorial positions and act as a newspaper, you are not alone. First amendment principles protect the right to speak, protect the right not to speak, and protect your right not to be forced to speak. All of these rights necessarily work together, all are necessarily equally important. If Parler does not wish to take positions, how can Google force it to do so?
Federal courts have <a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1158381.html" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1158381.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1611170628796000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEcQnr0734Fkw3p-ApbTbR41vPeXw">explained</a> that Congress’ enactment of Section 230 in 1996 was an effort “to encourage the unfettered and unregulated development of free speech on the Internet, and to promote the development of e-commerce.” Section 230, therefore, was meant to promote, widen and expand the promulgation of speech on the internet, not to restrict, curtail and suppress it. In fact, Section 230 specifically identifies diversity of political discourse as desirable, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1611170628796000&amp;usg=AFQjCNF78QiD7ozeqHgs-0I9uzr8ntTe7g">expressly advocating</a> for “interactive computer services [to] offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse.” 
But restriction and suppression of speech is Google’s very goal here, an accusation they do not even deny.
In taking actions against Parler, and others, so directly antithetical to the express language of Section 230, it seems clear that Google, and possibly other social media companies, are themselves in direct violation of Section 230.
Google is far from alone in its exploitation and abusive use of Section 230.  In 2019, Facebook argued before the second circuit that it was <a href="https://casetext.com/case/force-v-facebook-inc" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://casetext.com/case/force-v-facebook-inc&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1611170628796000&amp;usg=AFQjCNE76MDSt6qQZXOHRPvN9XrhKo_o2A">immune to suit</a> under Section 230, after Hamas, a U.S.-recognized terrorist group, incited and created a plan on Facebook that resulted in the murder of five Americans. Hamas were then able to celebrate these murders on the site. As with Nohemi Gonzalez and Google, the court found that even if promotion of the murders occurred on Facebook’s site, Facebook was immune from liability, since it did not create or develop the content of the messages.
The shocking (and arguably illegal) 180-degree reversal by Google and the other social media giants related to content moderation raises serious questions as to the motivations of these companies. Do their positions truly keep reversing, or is there something else here at play?
Given the dubious timing, stunning across-the-board social media coordination, and the seeming obsession with weakening and even blocking right-leaning services and platforms completely, it is worth considering whether anti-competitive collusion between the social media giants exists. If the exclusive syndicate of social media giants that control access to nearly all of the ideas and content exchanges on the internet are conspiring to limit which other companies may, too, enjoy that unique privilege, then the free exchange of ideas on the internet is already dead.
There is hope. The full free and fair exchange of ideas, even if damaged and tampered with, can always be returned to our society. But that process is an arduous and noble one. It begins with an unbiased and truly independent investigation into the behavior of these tight-knit social media companies. The Justice Department is already suing Google for monopolistic practices and its recent behavior surely will not help its cause. But at this point, it seems necessary for the DOJ to broaden the investigation into all of the social media giants and to ascertain whether, indeed, there has been an anti-competitive conspiracy at play. The first amendment and survival of free speech itself depends on it.
Jeffrey Lax is an attorney, professor and department chair at the City University of New York. He has hosted talk radio programs on 770 WABC and 970 WNYM in New York and appears on Newsmax TV as a legal analyst.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

How Big Tech’s Bullying of Parler and Non-Compliance with Section 230 Could Lead to its Demise

First Amendment

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) told PBS last week that he supports companies that have recently started to de-platform Republican politicians, saying, “Thank goodness they’re pushing back now.”
Manchin made the remarks during an interview on “Firing Line with Margaret Hoover” when asked about the response to the recent riot in the nation’s capital.
“You called for Twitter to suspend President Trump’s accounts hours before they did permanently last Friday—” Hoover said.
“Days, days before they did,” Manchin interrupted.
“The president has been now banned from Facebook,&#8221; Hoover continued. &#8220;Parler, an app that is preferred by some conservatives, has been booted off of Apple, Amazon, and Google. The PGA has pulled its 2022 Championship from the Trump National Golf Course in New Jersey, and Simon &amp; Schuster has dropped Josh Hawley’s book. Do you support all these examples of de-platforming?”
“I do. I really do,” Manchin responded. “I think there’s a responsibility they all have. These are private platforms. These are private individuals. These are basically publicly owned companies, and thank goodness they’re pushing back now.”
“Change comes, the markets change because of the pressure that’s put on,” Manchin continued. “So, maybe this will give my Republican colleagues some support that they can be free. The truth will set you free. Maybe they can break the bonds, these chains that they have of captivity within the Republican ranks, that they’re afraid they’re going to be primarried or there’s going to be challenges or things that they have to deal with that they’d rather not.”
WATCH:
<iframe loading="lazy" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kfB9G0Z15kc?start=634" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen">﻿</iframe>
PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT:
<blockquote>MARGARET HOOVER, HOST: “You called for Twitter to suspend President Trump’s accounts hours before they did permanently last Friday—”
SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): “Days, days before they did.”
HOOVER: “The president has been now banned from Facebook. Parler, an app that is preferred by some conservatives, has been booted off of Apple, Amazon, and Google. The PGA has pulled its 2022 Championship from the Trump National Golf Course in New Jersey, and Simon &amp; Schuster has dropped Josh Hawley’s book. Do you support all these examples of de-platforming?”
MANCHIN: “I do. I really do. I think there’s a responsibility they all have. These are private platforms. These are private individuals. These are basically publicly owned companies, and thank goodness they’re pushing back now. Change comes, the markets change because of the pressure that’s put on. So, maybe this will give my Republican colleagues some support that they can be free. The truth will set you free. Maybe they can break the bonds, these chains that they have of captivity within the Republican ranks, that they’re afraid they’re going to be primaried or there’s going to be challenges or things that they have to deal with that they’d rather not.”
HOOVER: “What is your response to those who fear that by de-platforming President Trump, you further embolden the kind of people who stormed the Capitol and those who are sympathetic with their movement?”
MANCHIN: “That’s the reason I say we need the time. That is exactly, you put it better than I can, that’s exactly. And we will embolden, and it will happen. It will entrench them more. Okay? And the true believers will be even stronger [and] using more radical tactics maybe. We just want the facts to come out that everyone felt the same that we do. We have to do this to save our country.”</blockquote>

Menu