THE HIGHLANDS TEA PARTY MEETING 11/03/2020 – NO MEETING, GET OUT AND VOTE FOR AMERICAN VALUES, NOT SOCIALISM
October 30th, 2015 | 
Author: THE HIGHLANDS TEA PARTY
IN GOD WE TRUST, IN WHOSE HANDS WE PUT OURS, AND OUR NATION’S DESTINY
THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND ALL MEETINGS
PARTY AFFILIATION IS NOT AN ISSUE.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:
We are a private party, we will ask those who create a disturbance
to leave everyone is allowed to make a comment on a subject but
will be limited to 2 minutes, and must be on the subject
matter that the speaker is presenting..
Would you like to make a donation to help us continue to educate
the people on Legislation, Candidates, & Constitution,
bring in great speakers, and support our community events.
This link really does work, give it a try.
PLEASE CLICK BELOW
The safest way to contribute
VIETNAM VETERANS OF AMERICA CENTER
33565 Grand Prix Dr
Sebring, FL
(This is behind Walmart)
Door opens at 5:00 PM
Time: 6:00 to 8:00 PM
We will furnish Iced tea Sweet & Unsweet, Coffee Regular & Decafe,
Water, and cookies/donuts
COVID-19 spacing will be followed as much as possible. Couples can
sit together, and those of small groups who socialize regularly
may sit together Please wear a mask.
WE SUPPLY FACE MASK
A small donation would be appreciate
AGENDA
11/03/2020
NO MEETING GET OUT AND CAST YOUR VOTE
FOR AMERICAN VALUES – NO SOCIALISM!
UP COMING EVENTS & SPEAKER
Nov. 03, 2020 –
Nov. 10, 2020 – Kimberly Gunn (Sheriffs Dept.) Update on Child Trafficking.
Nov. 17, 2020 – Eric Zwayer – Tax Collector Highlands County – update on the Office.
Nov. 24, 2020 – Meeting Thanksgiving WISHING ALL A HAPPY THANKSGIVING
Dec. 01, 2020 – Business meeting – Where does the Tea Party go from here? Discussion based on the outcome of the election
Dec. 15, 2020 – GENERAL BUSINESS & CHRISTMAS PARTY – COOKIES, CUP CAKES etc.
Dec. 22, 2020 – NO MEETING CHRISTMAS – WISHING ALL A VERY JOYOUS CHRISTMAS
Dec. 29, 2020 – NO MEETING CHRISTMAS BREAK FOR FAMILY TIME (My family will be here)
Next meeting will be January 5, 2021
THE HIGHLANDS TEA PARTY ONCE AGAIN IS GOING TO MAKE A DONATION TO WREATHS ACROSS AMERICA.
WE ARE ASKING OUR PATRIOTS TO PITCH IN AND CONTRIBUTE WHAT YOU CAN TO THIS NOBLE CAUSE
BETWEEN NOW AND NOVEMBER 10TH. DONATIONS CAN BE MADE HERE AT THE
PAYPAL LINK ABOVE (Very Secure) OR AT OURTWO UPCOMING MEETINGS MEETINGS.
LET’S SEE YOUR NAME ON THIS LIST!
Jan. 24, 2020 – John Larsen – Free Speech cannot be stopped
Feb. 02, 2020 – John Nelson – Meeting not about Gun Control -message to the commissioners 2nd Amendment Resolution meeting.
Feb. 04, 2020 – John Nelson – Where is the Hate – Response to a lady who stated the Heartland Herald was a paper “Spewing Hate”
Feb. 08, 2020 – Georgia Lee Eshelman – U.S Residents are Fortunate – A Comparison to other countries.
Feb. 18, 2020 – John Nelson – Impeachment trial not like a civilian trial
Mar. 10, 2020 – John Larsen – CAUGHT – Article on catching person; leader of Indivisible stealing Heartland Herald papers
Apr. 24, 2020 – John Larsen – The impact on you – The impact of COVID-19
Aug, 06, 2020 – June Wheeler – Vote for what you believe in: Stand fast, Praise the Lord he will see us through it all
Aug . 22, 2020 – Georgia Lee Eshelman – Everyone Should Cast Their Vote
Sept. 08, 2020 – Georgia Lee Eshelman – Pray For Our Nation
Sept. 15, 2020 – Georgia Lee Eshelman – America Continues to Need Blessings
Sept. 20, 2020 – John Nelson – What happened to the First Amendment and Trespass laws?
Sept. 25, 2020 – Dana Orr – Elections are not for sale
Sept. 25 , 2020 – Mary van Hooreweghe – Ready to vote for trump
Education is the key – This is The Tea Parties Objective!
We are a conservative, partisan, patriotic, Constitution,
GOD loving organization!
GOD BLESS AMERICA
WE ASK THAT ALL GUEST SPEAKERS BE TREATED RESPECTFULLY
There are NO EXCUSES for DISRESPECT!
Posted in 
Dow down 950 points, worst day since June
Dow down 950 points, worst day since June
Stocks tumbled on Monday, as traders expressed concerns on whether U.S. lawmakers would pass another fiscal stimulus bill to support the economy and as Europe put additional restrictions in place to fight the COVID-19 pandemic.
THIS IS BIG!!! – Kamala Harris Is Not Eligible to Be Vice-President of the United States
Kamala Harris Is Not Eligible to
Be Vice-President of the United States
ATTENTION: Major social media outlets are finding ways to block the conservative/evangelical viewpoint. Click here for daily electronic delivery of The Stand’s Daily Digest – the day’s top blogs from AFA.
BRYAN FISCHERRADIO HOST MORE
The Constitution says that a vice-president must meet the same eligibility requirements as the president: “[N]o person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.” Article II of the Constitution specifies “[n]o person except a natural born citizen…shall be eligible to the office of President.”
Senator Kamala Harris is not, from a constitutional standpoint, a natural-born citizen of the United States. She was born on American soil, but that’s not enough to qualify for birthright citizenship. Here is the actual language of the 14th Amendment (emphasis mine throughout):“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” It’s not enough just to be born on U.S. soil. You must both be born on U.S. soil and be subject “to the jurisdiction thereof” when it happens.
It’s not even enough that one’s parents be legally present in the U.S. at the time of the child’s birth. The issue is to whom do the parents – and therefore the child – owe their ultimate allegiance. So while they may temporarily be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S., their ultimate allegiance, the ultimate jurisdiction to which they are subject, belongs to the nation of their birth, the land where they possess citizenship and from whence they came.
Sen. Harris’ father is a Jamaican national and her mother is from India, and neither was a naturalized U.S. citizen at the time of Harris’ birth in 1964. In fact, neither of them was even a “lawful permanent resident” of the U.S. at the time. This means that she is not a “natural born citizen”—and therefore this also means she is ineligible for the office of vice-president.
John Eastman is one of the most distinguished constitutional law experts in America. He is a professor of law at Chapman University and a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute. The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” means, he writes, “subject to the complete jurisdiction, not merely a partial jurisdiction such as that which applies to anyone temporarily sojourning in the United States (whether lawfully or unlawfully).”
Thus the fact that her parents were sojourning here legally is not decisive. The issue is not location, it is citizenship.
While most Americans, untrained in the Constitution, believe that anyone born on U.S soil is automatically a citizen, this is actually a new idea, unheard of until the late 1960s. As Eastman points out, “the Supreme Court has never held that anyone born on U.S. soil, no matter the circumstances of the parents, is automatically a U.S. citizen.” Birthright citizenship only belongs to those whose parents were subject to the jurisdiction of the United States the moment they were born.
For example, children born in the U.S. to guest workers from Mexico during the 1920s were not regarded as citizens, nor were children born to guest workers in the bracero program of the 1950s and early 1960s.
Diplomats are “subject to the jurisdiction” of their homeland. That’s why children born to diplomats in the U.S. are not citizens of the United States. Legally and constitutionally, their children are no more “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. than their parents are. If a child’s parents are not American citizens when the child is born, neither is the child.
Diplomats often use the concept of “diplomatic immunity” to get themselves and their children out of trouble on American soil by claiming that the children are not under the authority, or “jurisdiction,” of American law. All the American government can do in such circumstances is send them back to their home country. We can’t lock them up; all we can do if they misbehave is deport them.
It’s worthy of note that the word “diplomat” is not in the 14th Amendment. The children of a diplomat are not regarded as citizens by birth. This is not because their father is a diplomat, but because he is a citizen of a foreign country. Since the parents are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, neither are the children.
The logic is inescapable. If the children of foreign diplomats are not U.S. citizens by birth, how is it possible that children of temporary residents or illegal aliens could be?
A key question has to do with the precise meaning of the Jurisdiction Clause in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified. The best tool for answering that question is to look at the Civil Rights Act (CRA) of 1866, enacted the same year that the Fourteenth Amendment was written by Congress.
The 14th Amendment was intended, in fact, to elevate the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 to constitutional status and insulate it from legal challenge.
The Civil Rights Act included a provision to secure citizenship for former slaves, to nullify the infamous Dred Scott opinion. The provision read, “All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.”
According to the CRA, Indians who were not taxed were not eligible for citizenship. The reason they weren’t taxed by the United States was that they were subject to the “foreign power” of the sovereign Indian nations to which they belonged.
As Ken Kuklowski puts it, “The Fourteenth Amendment only commands citizenship to persons born on U.S. soil to parents who are not citizens of a foreign country.”
Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, considered the father of the 14th Amendment, explained the language of the amendment this way: “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”
The “Jurisdiction” clause was added to the 14th Amendment only after a lengthy debate. According to NumbersUSA, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan proposed the amendment because he wanted to make it clear that the simple accident of birth on U.S. soil was not in fact enough to confer citizenship.
Sen. Howard said the jurisdiction requirement is “simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already,” a reference to the Civil Rights Act of 1866.
In his debate, Sen. Howard said, “[T]his will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States.”
Here is a great question: if citizenship was granted by birth alone, why did it take an act of Congress in 1922 – 54 years after the ratification of the 14th Amendment – to grant citizenship to American Indians, every one of whom had been born on American soil?
Since 1795, aliens have been required to renounce allegiance to any foreign power and declare allegiance to the U.S. Constitution to become a naturalized citizen. Such allegiance was never assumed for aliens who were born here or migrated here. We have a framed copy of my great-grandfather’s renunciation of his allegiance to the Czar of Russia as a family heirloom. That renunciation was a prerequisite to his being granted full citizenship in the United States.
The way forward is simple. Section 5 of the 14th Amendment gives power to Congress to “enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”
Some well-meaning Republican candidates are calling for an amendment to the Constitution to ban birthright citizenship. But in truth, the Constitution does NOT need to be amended. It only needs to be applied.
Bottom line: Are children of foreign sojourners American citizens? No. Why? Because the Constitution says they aren’t.
As realists, none of us expect that anything will come of all this. We long ago as a nation decided that we will not be troubled by the parts of the Constitution that are inconvenient. But perhaps it’s time we started following the whole thing, not just the parts we happen to like. Kamala Harris is as good a place as any to start.
WHY ISN’T ATTORNEY GENRAL BARR DOING HIS JOB?
One is supposed to believe that Attorney General William Barr is in charge of the Department of Justice, and that FBI Director Christopher Wray works for Barr. Both men purportedly work for President Donald J. Trump. President Trump has been very clear about his desire and directives to declassify and release all materials related to the “Russia!” hoax. The President is consistently ignored by his staff.
Judicial Watch submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on February 16, 2018, to the FBI. It sought text messages sent from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2015, between FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and FBI attorney Lisa Page, FBI Special Agent Jennifer Leonard, FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok, and/or Obama administration Homeland Security Advisor Lisa Monaco. In response, the FBI denied the request, asserting (incredibly) that text messages are not subject to FOIA.
Judicial Watch challenged the FBI’s determination. It filed an administrative appeal with the Department of Justice arguing that “text messages involving government-related business sent between government officials, whom all of the persons identified in the scope of the request are, do in fact constitute government records that fall within the purview of FOIA.” [Emphasis added]
In response, the Justice Department’s Office of Information Policy remanded Judicial Watch’s request for “further review,” but the FBI ignored the directive and continues to withhold any text messages. Judicial Watch sued on October 19, 2020, just a few days ago, after the FBI failed to respond (again) to the remanded request.
The Wray FBI is acting in a disgracefully dishonest manner, and the attorneys of the Barr Justice Department are the advocates peddling this nonsense in federal courts. Here is what your government says it can do: Delete and keep secret all text messages – including those by the dirty cops running an illicit coup against President Trump.
Keep in mind that this sort of arrogant, uncorrected (and largely ignored) corruption goes on in Washington DC all the time. AG Barr accepts it all and takes no action.
Last month, Judicial Watch uncovered that senior members of Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel’s Office (SCO) repeatedly and “accidentally” wiped over 20 phones assigned to them. All just a coincidence, right?
The President has the authority to appoint his own Special Counsel (28 C.F.R. Part 600). He is not required to wait for AG Barr to act. Given AG Barr’s affinity for nonsense like Mueller’s wiped phones and denying that government text messages on government phones, sent by government agents, on government time about government business are somehow not government records – one is left to believe the President has waited far too long for AG Barr to actually “do” something (beyond Durham’s indictment one third-stringer flunky DoJ attorney [Clinesmith].
Ask yourself why AG Barr fights Judicial Watch in virtually every FOIA lawsuit seeking records over the Obamagate coup plot. Why does he permit the FBI to claim in court that their agents’ text messages on their government phones are not government records? That’s insultingly preposterous – but it is the Justice Department’s position. Your tax dollars in action.
At this point, one must believe that someone in the Trump White House has caught onto this pattern of conduct at the FBI and the Justice Department. The President is not well-served if this goes on and on and on – at this point for years – and no real action is taken. The past Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Rick Grenell, seemed to make some headway. Now DNI John Ratcliffe has moved the ball down the field a few more yards. Should President Trump be re-elected, the time will have come to break some china and flip over some tables at the FBI and Justice. Hopefully, President Trump will then show people what a “disruptor” truly looks like. https://www.
I went back and dug up another DOJ/FBI coverup:
“The Ruby Ridge incident was a tragedy that deeply affected and divided many of the citizens of this county and country,” Benson’s statement said. “It is our hope that this decision will begin the healing process that is so long overdue.” Think about this for a moment, don’t just read it and move on. This is a lying claim “to begin the healing process”. Sound familiar? It’s a lie because covering up murder guarantees the blood of the innocent festers and cries out to heaven above for justice. Covering up crimes does not begin healing, only justice does!
Readers invited to read:
Attorney General Barr: Defender of FBI Snipers
“…In the early 1990s, federal agencies targeted Randy Weaver, an outspoken white separatist living on a mountaintop in northern Idaho. After Weaver was entrapped by an undercover Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agent, U.S. marshals trespassed on Weaver’s land and killed his 14-year-old son, Sammy. The following day, FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi killed his wife as she was standing in the cabin doorway holding her 10-month-old baby. Horiuchi had previously shot Randy Weaver in the back after he stepped out of the cabin. The suspects were never given a warning or a chance to surrender and had taken no action against FBI agents….” https://www.fff.org/
In other words the FBI having bungled the plan to blackmail Weaver into becoming a mole for the agency, then pressed on knoxking off disobedient Weaver family members. In the end it was Barr who helped circle the DC wagons and facilitated the exoneration of the FBI sniper hit man.
Eventually, the shameful sorted story came out and Congress awarded over three million dollars to survivor Randy Weaver. I call this hush money, because justice for the deliberate cold blooded murder of Weaver’s wife and son is still waiting and waiting……
Justice delayed is justice denied!
WHEN YOU DON’T TEACH HISTORY! October 26, 2020
From our friend…who can see the forest for the trees…
Over the past several months..we have been deluged with such slogans as “The United States was built on Slavery”..”The war against the British was fought to protect slavery…”..”The CONSTITUTION was written to protect slavery”…”The Founding Fathers who wrote our CONSTITUTION only wanted to protect Slavery”…I could go on and on…but we all know exactly what the media and the sycophants in the Democratic party and the Left want the world to believe…EXCEPT …IT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE…
Some basic questions need to be asked…the “nuts and bolts” questions…Such as…Where did this revolt against Britain that eventually led to the CONSTITUTION find its origins?…Did it find is origins in the Southern Slave States as all these newbies want you to believe?…Not exactly!…You would think, if you have carefully been listening over the past 6 months..that the impetus and blood spilled by “OUR” early citizens was a Southern manifestation of protecting their Slaves… EXCEPT…that reasoning would be horrible wrong..
You see…the main drivers of the American Revolution were not at all based in the Southern Slave States…not even a close call..The driving forces that led to the revolt against the CROWN of ENGLAND was almost entirely…nearly all of it by places like Boston…Philadelphia…New Jersey…New York…You remember..THE BOSTON TEA PARTY was not exactly a Southern Drink Fest…As a matter of fact…If one takes the time to review “ALL” the major military battles fought by our REVOLUTIONARY FOREFATHERS…you will also find that almost all those battles were fought in what would be called the Northern States…the “FREE STATES”..not the SLAVE STATES…
Yes that’s right ..the blood that was shed was so that we could be free of the crown of England and it had little if anything to do with Slavery!…Racism!..and any such rot that is being told to our kids in today’s classrooms…Washington’s troops fought ALMOST ALL their battles in the North..In NY..in New Jersey…In Pennsylvania…Washington was indeed from Virginia…but the blood he saw spilled was NOT spilled in the South…And anyone who claims that the Declaration of Independence was a document that comes ..in some way..from the wounds of Slavery is simply lying and trying to re-write the truth…
Jefferson may have indeed crafted that Document…and he indeed had Slaves…But the people who died for that document …for the most part…not only had no slaves…but never did…before or after 1776…
Is there racism in this country?..you bet there is..is there anti Semitism in the country?…you bet there is…In fact..Jews were slaves (to the Pharaohs) ..BUT our country did NOT find its origins in 1619 like the NY Times is trying to re-write …and the men who died for that document…had nothing to do with 1619…they all…everyone of them died for the document written in 1776…And SLAVERY..had almost nothing to do with the war that is the foundation of our country…
1776 is when we started…and if your kids do no know that fact…you..me…and the rest of us are being robbed of who we are…And if you don’t know who you are…you most certainly do not know where you are going…and your future is very, very grim..
When you vote next week..think about where we are going..and think about who we really are…
—
Floyd Stern stern.floyd@gmail.com
Disclaimer: Our Anonymous writer spent 40 years in the news industry, and has written several books. Floyd Stern, the signatory of these letters, is a close friend of this writer who has stated that he prefers to remain anonymous and is currently retired from the News business.
Tony Bobulinski held presser claiming Joe Biden knew about Hunter’s business deals
“I’ve heard Joe Biden say he never discussed business
with Hunter. That is false.”
Ex-Hunter Biden associate Tony Bobulinski claims that
Joe Biden and his family profited from deals with China
at a Trump 2020 press conference.
Mr. Bobulinski will not meet with Ron Johnson
and his committer the FBI wants to interview him first:
On Friday morning 10/23/2020, lawyers for Bobulinski informed the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and Senate Finance Committee that the FBI asked his client to sit for an interview later that day, in addition to providing copies of his phones, according to the release from Johnson’s office. “Mr. Bobulinski has agreed to honor his commitment to sit for an interview in the near future with the Committees,” the release stated.
Johnson said, “I appreciate that the FBI has a job to do, and I am glad they are finally taking an interest in these concerning financial matters that our Committees have been investigating for months,” said Johnson. “I expect that Mr. Bobulinski will speak with our committee as soon as possible and fully share his insights into the Biden family’s business dealings.”
Trump posts Biden’s fracking-ban remarks
WND TV
‘Here you go, Joe’: Trump posts Biden’s fracking-ban remarks
Democrat said during primary he ‘would make sure it’s eliminated’
Joe Biden (Video screenshot)
After promising at the debate Thursday night to post a video contradicting Joe Biden’s claim he has never said he would ban fracking, President Trump delivered.
“Here you go @JoeBiden!” Trump wrote in a tweet that included a link to a video montage of both Biden and running mate Kamala Harris.
It shows Biden being asked during a Democratic primary debate: “Would there be any place for fossil fuels, including coal and fracking, in a Biden administration?” “No. We would work it out. We would make sure it’s eliminated and no more subsidies for either one of those,” Biden said.
The video also shows Harris saying there’s “no question I’m in favor of banning fracking.”
Trump pressed Biden on the issue Thursday night.
“I have never said I oppose fracking,” Biden said.
“You said it on tape,” Trump retorted.
“Show the tape. Put it on your website,” Biden said.
Proponents argue fracking, a process that injects liquid at high pressure to break up shale and extract oil and natural gas, has helped make the United States energy independent. And they point out that natural gas burns more cleanly and emits less carbon dioxide than coal.
Opponents contend it contaminates water and causes noise and air pollution, threatening human health. In the key presidential election battleground of Pennsylvania, the commonwealth’s Department of Labor and Industry says fracking supports 20,000 to 50,000 jobs. Pennsylvania is the country’s second-largest producer of natural gas, behind Texas.
In a tweet Friday morning, Senate Republicans said the Democrats’ “radical energy agenda is on full display.” “Their promise to ban fracking as well as their so-called ‘Green New Deal’ would destroy America’s energy industry and cause energy bills to spike for families across America.”
See the video: Double Click Below
CHINESE NATIONALS WO ARE WORKING CENSORSHIP FOR FACEBOOK – LIKE BIDEN, IN BED WITH THE CCP
Meet your (Chinese) Facebook censors
Shutterstock
The insider shared an internal directory of the team that does much of this work. It’s called Hate-Speech Engineering (George Orwell, call your office), and most of its members are based at Facebook’s offices in Seattle. Many have Ph.D.s, and their work is extremely complex, involving machine learning — teaching “computers how to learn and act without being explicitly programmed,” as the techy website DeepAI.org puts it.
When it comes to censorship on social media, that means “teaching” the Facebook code so certain content ends up at the top of your newsfeed, a feat that earns the firm’s software wizards discretionary bonuses, per the ex-insider. It also means making sure other content “shows up dead-last.”
Like, say, a New York Post report on the Biden dynasty’s dealings with Chinese companies.
To illustrate the mechanics, the insider took me as his typical Facebook user: “They take what Sohrab sees, and then they throw the newsfeed list into a machine-learning algorithm and neural networks that determine the ranking of the items.”
Facebook engineers test hundreds of different iterations of the rankings to shape an optimal outcome — and root out what bosses call “borderline content.”
It all makes for perhaps the most chillingly sophisticated censorship mechanism in human history. “What they don’t do is ban a specific pro-Trump hashtag,” says the ex-insider. Instead, “content that is a little too conservative, they will down-rank. You can’t tell it’s censored.”
I won’t share the names of the Facebook employees in question. The point isn’t to spotlight individuals, but to show how foreign nationals from a state that still bans Facebook have their hands on the levers of social media censorship here in America.
The Hate-Speech Engineering team’s staff includes a research scientist based at the Seattle office who earned his master’s degree in computer engineering from the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing, according to his LinkedIn profile.
Another member of the team, a software engineer for machine learning based in Seattle, earned his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in computer science from Jilin University in northeast China. Still another, an engineering manager, earned his bachelor’s in computer science at Nanjing University in eastern China.
Another software engineer previously worked for the Communist-backed conglomerate Huawei, as well as the Beijing National Railway & Design Institute of Signal and Communication. I reached out to all six employees; two replied to confirm that they are Chinese nationals but refused to comment further; the rest didn’t reply.
Plenty of Big Tech firms, of course, recruit their foreign specialists from China, India and elsewhere, and many of these workers hope to resettle in the United States permanently and share the American Dream.
But some may not, and the trouble is that the society they might return to already deploys one of the most comprehensive and fine-tuned intellectual control mechanisms on its own population. What’s to stop Facebook’s Chinese engineers from delivering their Facebook expertise to Xi Jinping? Globalists thought that engaging with China would make that country more open; I fear it’s making us more restrictive.
A Facebook spokesperson denied that these employees influence broader policies. “We are a stronger company because our employees come from all over the world. Our standards and policies are public, including about our third-party fact-checking program, and designed to apply equally to content across the political spectrum. With over 35,000 people working on safety and security issues at Facebook, the insinuation that these employees have an outsized influence on our broader policies or technology is absurd.”
Yet, as Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) put it in an email to me, these revelations are yet “another indication that Big Tech is no longer deserving” of statutory protections that render it immune to a publisher’s liabilities. Big Tech critic Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), meanwhile, said “this is all the more reason for the Senate to demand that Mark Zuckerberg — under oath and before the election — give an account of what Facebook has been up to.”
Sohrab Ahmari is The Post’s op-ed editor. This is his second column based on conversations with a Facebook insider.
IN CASE YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN!
Many Voters are sitting on the fence still not knowing
who to vote for. Maybe they need a reminder of why
they voted for Donald Trump in 2016 to move them to
vote for Trump in 2020! I’ve attached a JPEG to share
on Facebook and other social media sites.
Lawsuit follows lengthy investigation and seeks to break company’s (GOOGLE) grip over search traffic
Justice Department files long-awaited
antitrust suit against Google
The Justice Department filed an antitrust lawsuit Tuesday alleging that Google engaged in anticompetitive conduct to preserve monopolies in search and search advertising that form the cornerstones of its vast conglomerate.
The long-anticipated case, filed in a Washington, D.C., federal court, marks the most aggressive U.S. legal challenge to a company’s dominance in the tech sector in more than two decades, with the potential to shake up Silicon Valley and beyond. Once a public darling, Google attracted considerable scrutiny over the past decade as it gained power but has avoided a true showdown with the government until now.
The department alleged that Google, a unit of Alphabet Inc., is maintaining its status as gatekeeper to the internet through an unlawful web of exclusionary and interlocking business agreements that shut out competitors. The government alleged that Google uses billions of dollars collected from advertisements on its platform to pay mobile-phone manufacturers, carriers and browsers, like Apple Inc.’s Safari, to maintain Google as their preset, default search engine.
WASHINGTON AG TO FILE SECOND CAMPAIGN FINANCE DISCLOSURE LAWSUIT AGAINST GOOGLE The upshot is that Google has pole position in search on hundreds of millions of American devices, with little opportunity for any competitor to make inroads, the government alleged.
The lawsuit also took aim at arrangements in which Google’s search application is preloaded, and can’t be deleted, on mobile phones running its popular Android operating system. The government alleged Google unlawfully prohibits competitors’ search applications from being preloaded on phones under revenue-sharing arrangements.
Google owns or controls search distribution channels accounting for about 80% of search queries in the U.S., the lawsuit said. That means Google’s competitors can’t get a meaningful number of search queries and build a scale needed to compete, leaving consumers with less choice and less innovation, and advertisers with less competitive prices, the lawsuit alleged.
Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Google parent company, Alphabet
Google didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment, but the company has said its competitive edge comes from offering a product that billions of people choose to use each day. Alphabet’s shares opened Tuesday up roughly 1%, ahead of the broader market, after The Wall Street Journal first reported news of the impending suit.
The Mountain View, Calif., company, sitting on a $120 billion cash hoard, is unlikely to shrink from a legal fight. The company has argued that it faces vigorous competition across its different operations and that its products and platforms help businesses small and large reach new customers.
AMAZON, APPLE, GOOGLE, FACEBOOK FIGHT DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN TO BREAK UP BIG TECH
Google’s defense against critics of all stripes has long been rooted in the fact that its services are largely offered to consumers at little or no cost, undercutting the traditional antitrust argument around potential price harms to those who use a product. The lawsuit follows a Justice Department investigation that has stretched more than a year, and comes amid a broader examination of the handful of technology companies that play an outsize role in the U.S. economy and the daily lives of most Americans.
A loss for Google could mean court-ordered changes to how it operates parts of its business, potentially creating new openings for rival companies. The Justice Department’s lawsuit didn’t specify particular remedies; that is usually addressed later in a case. One Justice Department official said nothing is off the table, including possibly seeking structural changes to Google’s business. A victory for Google could deal a huge blow to Washington’s overall scrutiny of big tech companies, potentially hobbling other investigations and enshrining Google’s business model after lawmakers and others challenged its market power. Such an outcome, however, might spur Congress to take legislative action against the company.
The case could take years to resolve, and the responsibility for managing the suit will fall to the appointees of whichever candidate wins the Nov. 3 presidential election.
SEN. COTTON WARNS BIG TECH OVER CENSORSHIP: ‘WINTER IS COMING’
The challenge marks a new chapter in the history of Google, a company formed in 1998 in a garage in a San Francisco suburb — the same year Microsoft Corp. was hit with a blockbuster government antitrust case accusing the software giant of unlawful monopolization. That case, which eventually resulted in a settlement, was the last similar government antitrust case against a major U.S. tech firm. Google started as a simple search engine with a large and amorphous mission “to organize the world’s information.” But over the past decade or so it has developed into a conglomerate that does far more than that. Its flagship search engine handles more than 90% of global search requests, some billions a day, providing fodder for what has become a vast brokerage of digital advertising. Its YouTube unit is the world’s largest video platform, used by nearly three-quarters of U.S. adults.
Google has been bruised but never visibly hurt by various controversies surrounding privacy and allegedly anticompetitive behavior, and its growth has continued almost entirely unchecked. In 2012, the last time Google faced close antitrust scrutiny in the U.S., the search giant was already one of the largest publicly traded companies in the nation. Since then, its market value has roughly tripled to almost $1 trillion. The company takes on this legal showdown under a new generation of leadership. Co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, both billionaires, gave up their management roles last year, handing the reins solely to Sundar Pichai, a soft-spoken, India-born engineer who earlier in his career helped present Google’s antitrust complaints about Microsoft to regulators.
The chief executive has in his corner Messrs. Page and Brin, who remain on Alphabet’s board and in effective control of the company thanks to shares that give them, along with former Chief Executive Eric Schmidt, disproportionate voting power. Executives inside Google are quick to portray their divisions as mere startups in areas — like hardware, social networking, cloud computing and health — where other Silicon Valley giants are further ahead. Still, that Google has such breadth at all points to its omnipresence.
European Union regulators have targeted the company with three antitrust complaints and fined it about $9 billion, though the cases haven’t left a big imprint on Google’s businesses there, and critics say the remedies imposed on it have proved underwhelming. In the U.S., nearly all state attorneys general are separately investigating Google, while three other tech giants — Facebook Inc., Apple and Amazon.com Inc. — likewise face close antitrust scrutiny. And in Washington, a bipartisan belief is emerging that the government should do more to police the behavior of top digital platforms that control widely used tools of communication and commerce.
A group of 11 state attorneys general, all Republicans, joined the Justice Department’s case, officials said. More could join later, according to the court docket. Other states are still considering their own cases related to Google’s search practices, and a large group of states is considering a case challenging Google’s power in the digital advertising market, The Wall Street Journal has reported. In the ad-technology market, Google owns industry-leading tools at every link in the complex chain between online publishers and advertisers.
The Justice Department also continues to investigate Google’s ad-tech practices.
Democrats on a House antitrust subcommittee released a report this month following a 16-month inquiry, saying all four tech giants wield monopoly power and recommending congressional action. The companies’ chief executives testified before the panel in July. “It’s Google’s business model that is the problem,” Rep. David Cicilline (D., R.I.), the subcommittee chairman, told Mr. Pichai. “Google evolved from a turnstile to the rest of the web to a walled garden that increasingly keeps users within its sights.”
“We see vigorous competition,” Mr. Pichai responded, pointing to travel search sites and product searches on Amazon’s online marketplace. “We are working hard, focused on the users, to innovate.” Amid the criticism, Google and other tech giants remain broadly popular and have only gained in might and stature since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, buoying the U.S. economy — and stock market — during a period of deep uncertainty. At the same time, Google’s growth across a range of business lines over the years has expanded its pool of critics, with companies that compete with the search giant, as well as some Google customers, complaining about its tactics.
Specialized search providers like Yelp Inc. and Tripadvisor Inc. have long voiced such concerns to U.S. antitrust authorities, and newer upstarts like search-engine provider DuckDuckGo have spent time talking to the Justice Department.
.
A must-see homily from Fr. Edward Meeks delivered at Christ the King parish in Towson, MD on 10/11/2020. This is the homily that should be preached from every pulpit in America.
Courageous Priest Speaks The
TRUTH About Joe Biden and
Kamala Harris
YOU NEED TO WATCH THIS VIDEO, PLEASE LISTEN TO TO THE END.
If YOU DO NOT BELEIVE THE FIRST ONE CHECK OUT THIS
INTERVOEW OF DAVID.
442K subscribers
EWTN Global Catholic Network, in its 39th year, is the largest religious
media network in the world. EWTN’s 11 global TV channels are broadcast
in multiple languages 24 hours a day, seven days a week to over 300 million
television households in more than 145 countries and territories
PLEASE SEND THIS LETTER TO NBC REGARDING BROW BEATING OF PRESIDENT TRUMP AT THE NBC TOWN HALL BY BY ‘MODERATOR’ SAVANNAH GUTHRIE
This is a cut from Video not playable.
contact.nbcnews@nbcuni.com <contact.nbcnews@nbcuni.com>
Modify or add your own personal comments.
Savannah Guthrie’ s performance was the most unprofessional I’ve ever seen. Even a rookie wouldn’t have been as rude as she was. All in all, it was a disgusting, disgraceful performance by a poorly informed partisan. Savannah was totally disrespectful to the President of the United States! Watching people in the background, they agreed with what President Trump was saying, several looking disgusted as to the way Guthrie was handling the Town Hall, not even letting the guest become involved till after her 15 minutes of Browbeating the President. I don’t care who you are or how important you think you are, you will show respect to the President and Vice President of the United States of America regardless of what party they represent! Most educated people were told this when they were quite young. Thank God, Trump with his well-controlled responses, mopped the floor with her! This Town Hall was a major win for President Trump, and a major loss for Joe Biden, because NBC’s presentation was disgraceful, and the American people saw it!
