What did the Biden White House want removed?
A meme.
That’s right, even memes weren’t spared from the Biden White House’s censorship efforts.
363
3,594
247
15,351
When Clegg “countered that removing content like that would represent a significant incursion into traditional boundaries of free expression in the US,”
Slavitt disregarded the warning and the First Amendment.
83
1,718
50
9,074
What happened next? Facebook panicked.
In another April 2021 email, Brian Rice, Facebook’s VP of public policy, raised the concern that Slavitt's challenge felt “very much like a crossroads for us with the [Biden] White House in these early days.”
39
1,415
18
8,307
But Facebook wanted to repair its relationship with the White House to avoid adverse action:
“Given what is at stake here, it would also be a good idea if we could regroup and take stock of where we are in our relations with the [White House], and our internal methods too.”
49
1,334
24
7,852
This wasn’t the first time that the Biden White House was angry that Facebook didn’t censor more.
According to these documents, the Biden White House demanded to know why Facebook had not censored a video from @TuckerCarlson.
So, Facebook prepped its response.
50
1,514
22
8,245
To appease the Biden White House, talking points were drafted for Clegg.
Facebook was ready to tell the White House that it had demoted a video posted by Tucker Carlson by 50% in response to the White House’s demands, even though the post didn’t violate any policies.
129
2,196
79
10,013
Public pressure mounted as well.
In July 2021, President Biden publicly denounced Facebook and other social media platforms, claiming they were “killing people” by not censoring alleged “misinformation.”
reuters.com/business/healthc…
109
1,396
35
7,607
On August 2, 2021, Facebook admitted it was going to change its policies because of pressure from the Biden White House.
48
1,211
18
7,104
August 2, 2021:
“[Facebook’s] Leadership asked Misinfo Policy . . . to brainstorm some additional policy levers we can pull to be more aggressive against . . . misinformation. This is stemming from the continued criticism of our approach from the [Biden] administration.”
28
1,132
19
6,678
These documents, AND OTHERS that were just produced to the Committee, prove that the Biden Admin abused its powers to coerce Facebook into censoring Americans, preventing free and open discourse on issues of critical public importance.
Jul 27, 2023 · 4:03 PM UTC
72
1,346
36
7,467
Only after the Committee announced its intention to hold Mark Zuckerberg in contempt did Facebook produce ANY internal documents to the Committee, including these documents, which PROVE that government pressure was directly responsible for censorship on Facebook.
95
1,533
40
7,848
Based on Facebook’s newfound commitment to fully cooperate with the Committee’s investigation, the Committee has decided to hold contempt in abeyance. For now.
To be clear, contempt is still on the table and WILL be used if Facebook fails to cooperate in FULL.
276
1,367
49
8,509
