Democrats In Big Tech Are Working With Big Media To Implement A Leftist Regime

President Donald Trump was suspended from Twitter last January. He was president of the United States. A private company that acts as the largest platform for microblogging news and information globally took it upon itself to decree that his words were too dangerous.

Idiots in Washington, D.C., and the media want you to believe that Twitter’s actions were justified because the president refused to accept the results of an election. An election that was rife with irregularities and highly questionable practices was unable to be questioned. Any one of the millions who wanted to Stop the Steal must have also been one of the 400 participants in the Capitol revolt. You do the math.

Twitter stated that the sitting leader of the United States sent two offensive and inexcusable tweets.

First, he tweeted that the political movement that catapulted him to the presidency would proceed into the future and wouldn’t be disregarded. Oh, dear. The 75,000,000 incredible American Patriots who voted for Donald Trump, “AMERICA FIRST,” and “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN” will continue. They won’t be treated as poor, weak fools.

Second, he tweeted that he wouldn’t go to President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration. The ultimate political diss was too harsh for Twitter to allow. “To those who have asked,” he stated, “I won’t be going to the Inauguration on January 20.” Trump made good on his promise, and America installed a president selected by a party with a track record of election fraud.

Claiming that Trump glorified violence, Twitter quickly suspended Trump from the platform. As a privately owned business, Twitter claims that it can restrict the president from informing his 90 million followers and the rest of the country and the world about his perspectives and pronouncements. But Section 230 has been used by this private business to become a de facto form of liberal Democrat state-sponsored censorship.

When does public assistance limit the autonomy of private businesses? Certain socialists do not have a problem telling businesses what to do when attempting to profit. However, when a business pursues a political agenda rather than a financial goal, they are even more subject to oversight and regulation because our freedom hinges more on the voting habits of our fellow citizens than the bank accounts of certain executives.

Parler, the frontrunner in the competition for a conservative alternative to Twitter, became the most-downloaded application on earth before it was almost obliterated by a consolidated assault from Apple, Google, and Amazon Web Services. They lied about Parler, telling the media it was used to coordinate the mob which trespassed on Capitol Hill. Once again, liberal private businesses are taking unified, coordinated action to destroy a company that is a political opponent of the ruling power elite. When businesses use predatory pricing to kill their competition, the government steps in, but if they ban the use of systems and services by political rivals, no one seems to care.

Insane claims about the nature of the January 6, 2021 protest and the actions of 400 people have been used to legitimize Big Tech’s centralization of control and pulverizing of conservatives. They want to control our viewpoints. They want to determine who talks and who doesn’t. They want to decide who can access their bank accounts, transfer funds, and conduct commerce.

These businesses skyrocketed in popularity, which is the source of their power, and they can come crashing down to earth just as quickly. Americans must decide to shut down and turn off these Big Tech overlords.