In the case of the all-too-common abuse of force that comes from politicians who have too much, a bit of poetic justice is unfolding, as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) would be prosecuted after seeking to force Amazon to censor an e-book examining the COVID-19 pandemic.
The book, titled “The Truth About COVID-19,” published through Chelsea Greene Publishing, the plaintiff in the lawsuit. They allege that an official letter written through Warren and sent to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy in September is an attempt to overturn his First Amendment. rights.
In the letter, Warren suggested Jassy remove the bestseller written by Joseph Mercola and Ronnie Cummins from Amazon’s search results, arguing that he is committed to “perpetuating the harmful covid-19 conspiracies and false and misleading information about vaccines. “
Chelsea Greene responded by filing a lawsuit accusing Warren of “violating the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. “UU. al try to prevent booksellers from promoting and/or promoting” his book. The publisher cites the Supreme Court case bantam Books v. Sullivan, in which it ruled that government officials had violated the First Amendment by “sending letters to booksellers warning that the sale of certain books was potentially illegal. “
The ruling said that while personal corporations can censor speech on their platforms (as is the tradition of Facebook and Twitter), they do so on behalf of a government agent, adding that it is unconstitutional for state officials to pressure a personal corporation to remove “reprehensible speech. “
But Liz Warren can’t be bothered with all this nonsense.
According to their letter, a search on Amazon’s online page for the keywords “COVID-19” and “vaccine” would include the e-book in the most sensitive of search results. Warren called on Amazon to replace its algorithms “so they don’t. “more. “
Chelsea Greene issued a statement on the matter.
“The term ‘vaccine misdata,’ as warren uses it, refers to any discourse that challenges the protection and efficacy of COVID vaccines, even when that discourse is comprised of accurate factual data or a reasonable protected opinion,” the plaintiffs said. they allege that Warren’s letter contained blatant lies and unfounded accusations about the e-book and that Warren’s claims, even if correct, would not fit the constitutional protection of the e-book.
“I believe that effective remedies for COVID-19 have been suppressed and genuine conspiracies that are critical to the public welfare have been exposed,” Mercola said.
Margo Baldwin, president and editor of Chelsea Green, noted that the suppression of the government is indicative of a government flirting with tyranny.
“The government that is seeking to ban books is a very damaging slippery slope towards totalitarianism and cannot be allowed,” he said. “We’ve already been here in history and we know where it leads: tyranny!ban books and then make them disappear from search results. It’s the same. “
Following Warren’s letter, Barnes
Every day, it turns out that more and more “conspiracy theories” around the COVID-19 pandemic can no longer be called conspiracy theories. Instead, many have falsified assumptions and, in some cases, openly admitted past lies.
The federalist wrote that after two years of COVID hysteria, much of which continues to depend on who is on the rate, the “Centers for Disease Control, despite everything, has admitted that its COVID death and hospitalization count is inflated, 75% of COVID sufferers have at least 4 comorbidities, the vaccine does not save you from transmission, and the cloth mask has always been political theater. “
Health Feedback fact-checkers noted that CDC Director Rochelle Walensky’s comments that 75% of COVID-19 deaths are among those with 4 comorbidities “only apply to vaccinated people. “
The destructive dominance of data also extends to the executive branch. White House press secretary Jen Psaki revealed in July 2021 that the Biden regime is necessarily in cahoots with Facebook and aimed to “flag problematic posts that spread false data. “
Nathan J. Arnold, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said there is “no ‘misinformation’ in the book,” which shouldn’t matter anyway if all the speech is in fact constitutionally protected.
“I know the political landscape in which we all function is extraordinarily partisan, but we don’t need unpopular perspectives to be suppressed by whoever is in power,” Arnold said. “It transcends party politics. “
Please help us! If you’re tired of allowing radical big tech leaders, fake fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals, and lying traditional media to have unprecedented force over your information, make a donation to BPR to help us fight them. The time has come. The fact has never been so critical!