Dr. Epstein now believes that left-wing Big Tech can nudge 15 million to the Democrats in 2020 by slanting search results, with nobody aware that it is happening. Yet Republicans are asleep at the switch while Silicon Valley enemies plot GOP doom and the destruction of representative government.
Big Tech’s secret propaganda is a serious threat to our freedoms continuing, but there is little attention from concerned parties. That needs to change.
Spare audio:
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: Back in America, a tech story that might seem insignificant, but is not. In fact, it may determine what happens in the next presidential election; it very well may. A Google whistleblower has come forward to describe his company’s plans to remake the American political landscape. Google, of course, is the most powerful company in the world.
So when an anonymous whistleblower comes forward, in this case, telling Project Veritas that Google is using internal algorithms to shape what Americans see online, and by extension, what they think, you better take it seriously:
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fairness is a dog whistle, it does not mean what you think that it means and you have to apply doublethink in order to understand what they’re really saying.
What they’re really saying about fairness is that they have to manipulate their search results, so it gives them the political agenda that they want, and so they have to re-bias their algorithms so that they can get their agenda across.
CARLSON: That’s the definition of propaganda, again, being perpetuated by the single most powerful company in the history of the world.
This is not surprising to viewers of this show, James Damore was fired for Google for his political views, his totally conventional, moderate political views and then came on this show to describe the culture at Google. Watch this:
JAMES DAMORE: There are definitely some political biases within Google that I was trying to shed light on in the document, and that they affect many parts of the business and for example, who they do business with, and what type of content they create, and I really think that those political biases need to be addressed.
CARLSON: It’s not just whistleblowers — excuse me, hidden camera footage obtained by Project Veritas shows a conversation with a woman called Jen Gennai. Her Google title is Head of Responsible Innovations in the Global Affairs Department.
In that video, Gennai says that Google is working specifically on products to make certain that Donald Trump does not win another election. Quote, “We’re also training our algorithms like if 2016 happened again … would the outcome be different? People were not putting that line in the sand … that they were not saying that what’s fair and what’s equitable, so we’re like, well, we’re a big company, we’re going to say it.”
In other words, we’re going to try and affect the outcome of the 2020 presidential campaign. Gennai goes on to blast Elizabeth Warren’s proposal to break Google up into two companies. Why? Check out this reasoning, quote, “All these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation. It’s like a small company cannot do that.”
So using a company’s dominance on the internet to sway the outcome of an election. That’s their plan. There should be a term for what Gennai is describing. It turns out there is a term, it’s a term you’ve heard constantly from talking heads on television for more than two years. It’s called hacking an election. Google wants to hack our election. They’re saying that out loud.
As we’ve been told over and over again by CNN and the Washington Post and the New York Times and all the other propagandists. Hacking an election is very bad; at minimum it warrants a multiyear investigation by law enforcement agencies. And yet, it’s happening now.
The Washington establishment has said they want to prevent election interference. But of course, that’s a lie. They just want to make sure they control the elections. That’s their only goal. That’s why they’re not attacking the real source of election interference, which is Silicon Valley.
Google, Facebook and their ilk, they have far more political power than Russia ever has or ever will have. No serious person doubts that.
But the people in charge of our country don’t care about any of that. Because when Google meddles in an election, Democrats benefit.
By the way, if you want to find that video, you can’t access it on YouTube. Google took it down. That’s not surprising. You can already be tossed off of YouTube and Facebook if you decide they’re using speech they don’t, like they’ll accuse you of hate speech, whatever that means.
Now they can toss you off their sites just for putting up videos that make you look bad. They probably won’t be banning any DNC videos anytime soon, you can be certain of that.
Meanwhile, this week, Ravelry, a knitting social networking website with eight million members banned all explicit support for Donald Trump and only for Donald Trump, and they got away with it. And because they have gotten away with it, other platforms almost certainly will do the same thing.
All of this is going on flagrantly in public, but most Republicans haven’t even responded to it. They haven’t reacted at all.
As soon as the 2016 election was over, the press and Big Tech openly began plotting on how to control the narrative in 2020, which is another way of saying control the election outcome in 2020, and using the scapegoat of fake news as an excuse to control the public discourse.
Republicans were in charge of Congress at the time; they did nothing. The White House commands a vast regulatory apparatus. They’ve sat motionless and done nothing. The only Republican is seems even interested at all in the subject and keeping Big Tech in check at all is new senator Josh Hawley, he just introduced a bill that would force tech companies to act as genuinely open platforms in order to receive valuable regulatory benefits. That’s the deal. They’re violating the deal, nobody else seems to care.
Passing Hawley’s bill does not seem to be a conservative priority, though, no one in Congress is talking about it. That’s a big mistake.
Successful political parties look out for their supporters and for the public at large and protect them from harm. Republicans, meanwhile, are sitting in a stupefied fog of libertarianism, doing nothing while their ideas are suppressed, and their supporters are silenced.
One day, they’ll look up and find they have no supporters at all; who will be the blame for that? Only themselves.
Dr. Robert Epstein is not a Republican, but he is the preeminent researcher into the subject. He’s a senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology, and he is again, the world’s great expert on the effect of the tech companies on political discourse. He joins us today. Dr. Epstein, thank you very much for coming on.
DR. ROBERT EPSTEIN: Always a pleasure.
CARLSON: Seeing this video tape, reading the quotes from this Google executive, does this confirm what you’ve said in the past? Are you surprised by this? What’s your response?
EPSTEIN: I’m not surprised, in the least. It confirms in glowing terms, or in very ugly terms, if you want to look at it that way, that Google not only has the power to shift opinions and votes on a massive scale, but they exercise this power and this is what I measure in my research.
So I can tell you fairly precisely how many votes they can shift; I can tell you fairly precisely how many votes they shifted in 2018.
CARLSON: So why is that not hacking an election?
EPSTEIN: Well, it’s not hacking an election right now because Google and similar companies like Facebook are completely unregulated in the United States, so they can do whatever they please.
And if they all work together in 2020 to support the same presidential candidate, which is very likely, and probably it’ll be a candidate that I support, by the way, they can shift upwards of 15 million votes with no one knowing that they’ve been manipulated and without leaving a paper trail for authorities to trace.
CARLSON: So that’s it. There’s no election at that point. Our democracy is not real if that’s allowed to happen, correct?
EPSTEIN: Well, democracy becomes an illusion. Now, there are actions one can take. I’ve set up so far, the only two big monitoring systems that anyone has built to actually look over people’s shoulder as they’re doing election related online activities, and to aggregate that information and see what they are being shown by these big companies.
Now in 2020, I’m actually trying right now to raise funds to build a large scale monitoring system to keep an eye on these companies and to catch them in the act, literally catch them, when they are manipulating votes and opinions. And in my opinion, that’s the only way we can stop them. There are no laws in place that can stop them at the moment.
CARLSON: Calling attention to it might be the first step and you’ve done more than anyone to do that. Dr. Epstein, thank you very much.
EPSTEIN: My pleasure.
Oddly enough, the Times news article had no mention of Democrat operatives hiring provocateurs to create [...]]]>
Oddly enough, the Times news article had no mention of Democrat operatives hiring provocateurs to create violent incidents at Trump rallies to sully the candidate. James O’Keefe of Project Veritas went undercover and filmed the Democrats admitting to things like targeting the elderly and disabled with violence to maximize shock value. Scott Foval, national field director of Americans United for Change, was recorded saying, “We’ve been busing people in to deal with you f–ing assholes for 50 years.”
The San Jose event was violent and police protection was minimal.
But the Times article was not curious whether the man accused of vandalism, battery and the attempted theft of a Trump supporter’s sign was a paid agitator or was inspired to physical confrontation by provocateurs around him.
Instead, the Times is sad about how unkind we Americans have become in our politics.
]]>Trump rally skirmish reveals what a divided nation shares, New York Times News Service, October 24, 2016
SAN JOSE, Calif. — It was a fleeting confrontation between two strangers that might have otherwise been forgotten.
But the tussle over a Donald Trump campaign sign after a June rally in San Jose, California, has sent one man, Anthony McBride, to jail for six days, and left another, Steven Tong, lamenting the loss of civility in our democracy.
The rally where these two lives collided by happenstance erupted into one of the most violent episodes of this contentious presidential election. Video footage of protesters punching, egging and tackling Trump supporters went viral, sparking outrage among Republicans and soul-searching among Democrats.
Today, the clashes between ordinary people like McBride and Tong are playing out in the California courts, in a series of criminal prosecutions brought about as Republican officials accused a city led by Democrats of failing to protect Trump supporters at the rally.
The San Jose rally and its aftermath may be the most powerful illustrations of the dangerous polarization that has gripped the country during the 2016 election.
But a closer look at Tong, one of rally’s 24 victims, and McBride, one of 22 people charged with crimes after the event, suggests there is much the two men share. The economic struggles and personal dreams that guided them that day are not so different.
On June 2, Tong woke up in his parents’ house, where he has lived for three years, unable to afford a place of his own.
He is 46. He had dreamed of becoming a product designer and starting his own company. But art school was too expensive, and he left after a year.
Tong’s faith in the American dream has been shaken. But he had a ticket to see Trump speak.
That same morning, Anthony McBride, who is anti-Trump, woke up in the apartment of his friend’s mother, where he has lived for three years, unable to afford a place of his own.
He is 21. He dreams of being a fashion designer and starting his own company. But art school is too expensive. He works two jobs to save for it.
McBride’s faith in the American dream remains intact, but it is marred by the bigotry he sees as a product of Trump’s campaign.
Like many Asians in San Jose, Tong was born in Vietnam. He was 4 when communists captured Saigon. Officials forced Tong’s family to move to a remote hut.
When he was 9, his family made it to California. They embraced the Republican Party’s strong anti-communism stance.
Tong considers himself a moderate. He once cast a ballot for Bill Clinton. He says he does not agree with Trump’s remarks about immigrants and Mexicans.
Tong once felt boundless optimism about the United States. His parents, who worked entry-level jobs in electronics, had been able to buy a three-bedroom home. But now Tong cannot afford to rent a home of his own. He was drawn to the June rally by Trump’s promise to make America as strong as it was when Tong arrived.
Tong left the rally clutching a sign: “The silent majority stands with Trump.”
He walked back to his car, chatting with a teenager from Mexico who held a sign opposing Trump. They joked about trading signs. Nothing seemed threatening. But when Tong reached the parking garage, he witnessed protesters trying to steal Trump hats off the heads of an older Hispanic couple.
“I said, ‘Come on, guys,’” Tong recalled. “That’s when the crowd started turning on me. “
Tong ran into the garage. He noticed a tall black man coming behind him.
“It was a Tuesday, my day off,” McBride recalled. While checking Twitter, he noticed that Trump was coming to town.
McBride hoped to get into the rally “to go experience what he says for myself,” he said. But police officers blocked the entrance. So he drifted to the “free speech” area, where protesters gathered.
McBride considers himself a moderate. He opposes amnesty for undocumented immigrants. He believes the entrepreneurial spirit should be rewarded. But it is racism — not government regulation of the economy — that worries him. The son of an African-American father and an Irish mother, McBride blames the recent racial unrest on injustice.
To McBride’s generation, the spate of police killings of black people shows the limits of politics and the need for activism. Protests — not the election of a black president — have brought a modicum of justice.
Joining the gathering crowd outside the convention center, McBride felt he had justice on his side. But then the rally inside ended. Trump supporters poured out. Protesters chanted obscenities at them. They hurled insults back.
A black female protester burning an American flag got into a shoving match with a white female Trump supporter. A first-generation Mexican who opposes Trump punched in the nose a third-generation Mexican who supports him.
McBride admits he got angry that day. He says Trump supporters mistook him for Mexican and shouted insults.
He followed a wave of protesters into a parking garage. That’s where he spotted an Asian man with a Trump sign.
“I was kind of disappointed in him,” McBride recalled. “He’s a minority, and I didn’t see why he’s supporting Trump.”
McBride snatched Tong’s sign. Tong grabbed it back. They held it together, in a tug of war. McBride could see the fear in Tong’s eyes. McBride thinks back on that moment and regrets being the source of Tong’s fear.
But two weeks after the rally, police asked McBride to answer questions. McBride, who has no criminal record, cooperated. He did not ask for a lawyer. “I wasn’t scared because I didn’t do anything,” he said.
Afterward, he expected to be allowed to go home. Instead, they took him to jail, where he remained for six days, accused of vandalism, battery and the attempted theft of Tong’s sign.
Now McBride, who cannot afford a lawyer, is not sure if he should plead guilty to a crime he doesn’t feel he committed, or fight the charges. He thinks when he grabbed Tong’s sign, and about what made him let go.
“I realized it was stupid,” he recalled. “If it was on a different street, at a different time, I probably would have just talked to him about why he was supporting Trump. But it was not a regular day.”