Elon Musk, Twitter’s new owner and CEO, just dropped a bombshell that has no known parallel in American history: The Biden administration and the Democratic National Committee colluded with Twitter to swing the 2020 election to Joe Biden and his Democrats.

And whatever other spin you hear about these revelations, the title of this article is now an absolutely indisputable fact that even the most dishonest of people would have difficulty arguing against.  As such, the goal for progressive spin doctors now is not to dispute the fact that the Biden campaign and the Democrat party colluded with Twitter to interfere with the 2020 presidential election.  Their task is now to hide that fact from the public to the extent possible by dismissing it as inconsequential, and to convince the public that the collusion that did take place is not a serious violation of the public trust.

There is now extremely compelling evidence that the Hunter Biden laptop story, as we now know was reported accurately by the New York Post in October of 2020, was censored by Twitter at the behest of the Biden campaign team. 

This wasn’t inconsequential election interference, to be clear.  After the election, roughly 1-in-6 Biden voters polled said that they would not have voted for him had they been aware of the revelation about Hunter Biden’s laptop.  For those keeping track of the numbers we were fed about how many votes old Joe got in that election, that’s more than 12 million votes.

The mainstream media doesn’t seem to have taken much of an interest in the story, just as they didn’t take interest in the laptop revelation when it was first censored, or even later when it was proven to have been true all along.  None of that is surprising.  They will attempt to smother the inconvenient facts, refusing to give them the oxygen needed to survive more than a few news cycles. 

But what is really interesting is the tactic left-wing journos on Twitter are taking to deflect the implications of the story.

They all seem to have gotten the same memo, using exactly the same talking points, so here’s just one example.  Elon Musk makes a simple, and accurate statement:

“Twitter acting by itself to suppress free speech is not a violation of the 1st amendment, but acting under orders from the government to suppress free speech, with no judicial review, is.” [sic]

Tom Nichols responds to that statement by saying:

“Hi. As a certified political scientist, I can assure you that Joe Biden was not in charge of the US government in 2020.  That was actually Donald Trump.  Let me know if I can help with any questions.”

It’s such a curious evolution of thought on the subject for those on the left that it’s worth pointing out that, not so long ago, we all had to listen to countless progressives making the stupid argument that the NFL not letting Colin Kaepernick protest during the National Anthem would be tantamount to a violation of his First Amendment right to free speech.  Now, they seem to be arguing that the spirit of free speech is never in peril so long as the government isn’t actively working to suppress it.

And, according to Tom Nichols, it’s not just government involvement in the suppression of speech that qualifies it as a violation of free speech, but only suppression by whoever’s “in charge of the government” will qualify. 

That’s a curious argument, too.  If collusion with the government to censor free speech and the press is bad, which is a fact that their argument seems to accept, then you must blame the president, Nichols seems to suggest. 

You know, the one who’s “in charge” -- the “big guy.” 

That’s a dangerous Pandora’s Box for sycophantic journalists promoting this presidency to offer to the public.  They are all but granting the premise for a Biden impeachment on the grounds of suppression of free speech throughout the COVID pandemic, given that Biden White House spokeswoman, Jen Psaki, for all her skill in lying from the podium on behalf of the administration, admitted on camera that the White House was colluding with Facebook to censor stories that didn’t fit the “official” progressive narrative on masks, lockdowns, the origins of COVID, etc.

But, as I’m sure the eminently qualified “political scientist” knows, the First Amendment doesn’t mention the president, but rather, it specifically cites that “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” 

If the Constitution recognizes any threat against free speech in the federal government, it’s first and foremost the Congress, which is, by design, the most powerful branch of government.  And who was “in charge” of the Congress in 2020, when the Democratic National Committee, which was acting on behalf of a political party in the interest of electing the Democrat candidate as president, abridged Americans’ freedom of speech and silenced the free press by colluding with tech moguls to censor damaging content on Joe Biden’s behalf?

Was it illegal for the Joe Biden campaign and the DNC to do that?  That’s the wrong question, and not necessarily the one Americans are most concerned with right now.  The task for progressive journos isn’t to convince us that what the Democrats and the Biden campaign did wasn’t illegal.  Their task is to convince us that it shouldn’t serve as the horrific violation of the public trust that it appears to be.

And they certainly have their work cut out for them.  Because this story is just getting started, but here are the undeniable facts with which we are beginning:  Joe Biden, an uncharismatic fossil who spent half a century entrenched in Washington politics, along with his presidential campaign and the Democrat party, colluded with a multi-billion-dollar corporation to suppress the truth and ban the newspaper reporting it, in order to swing a presidential election in the Democrats’ favor. 

For all their confident posturing that this is a nothingburger, convincing the American people that all of that is no big deal with be an uphill battle for progressives.

Image: Pixabay / Pixabay License