Zero Hedge is Suspended from Twitter

(via The tech giants Google, Facebook and Twitter continue to purge conservative content from their platforms. In February 2018 Facebook launched a new algorithm to ensure that conservative news would not spread on the social media platform. The algorithm change caused President Donald Trump’s engagement on Facebook posts to plummet a whopping 45%.

In contrast, Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) do not appear to have suffered a comparable decline in Facebook engagement.

Top pro-Trump Facebook pages with daily traffic in the millions have seen 75% to 95% drop in traffic since the 2016 election.  Young Cons, Western Journalism,, Independent Journal ReviewRight Wing News, and several others have seen dramatic loss in traffic.

In 2016 The Gateway Pundit was one of the few conservative sites that supported candidate Trump – along with Breitbart, The Drudge Report, Infowars, Zero Hedge, Conservative Treehouse and others.  We were proud of our efforts to report the truth that led to Trump’s historic win.

In 2017 Harvard and Columbia Journalism Review found that The Gateway Pundit was the 4th most influential conservative news source in the 2016 election.

Because of this we were targeted and saw our numbers related to Facebook and Twitter decline dramatically.

Facebook eventually shut down our traffic stream from the social media platform questioning our news reports.  Today it is clear that our reporting was 100% accurate but it was taken down anyway.  And the leftie mainstream media was allowed to promote their inaccurate Trump hit pieces at the same time for years.

This is corrupt, if not criminal, behavior.

In March 2018 Trump 2020 Campaign Manager Brad Parscale warned Facebook to keep the playing field level.

Dozens of conservative websites have been banned and shutdown by Facebook and YouTube since then.
Without online pro-Trump voices it will be difficult for Republicans to win.

If people do not have the correct information how are they expected to make the correct decisions?

On Friday Twitter took down the Zero Hedge account.

Zero Hedge, an economics website, is one of the largest pro-Trump websites on the internet.

Zero Hedge told the Gateway Pundit they appealed the suspension.

“We have no idea what prompted Twitter’s actions, however if it is in response to a recent Buzzfeed article claiming we “doxxed” a Chinese doctor researching coronavirus in bats, that information was already public,” Zero Hedge told the Gateway Pundit.

Twitter just suspended them.

Brexit Party Leaves EU for Last Time, Carrying Union Jack ‘Home’

Brexit Party MEPs have left the European Union’s parliament for the last time, carrying the Union Jack “home”.

Speaking outside of the European Parliament building in Brussels on Friday, veteran Brexiteer, former Conservative MP, and Brexit Party MEP Ann Widdecombe said: “Today we celebrate our independence: our ability to control our own laws, our own trade deals, our own borders.

“We believe that Britain can now go forward into a future, rejoicing. For the MEPs leaving here today, our duty is done, our harvest is home, and now we’re off!”

Ms Widdecombe led the group off parliamentary grounds holding a Brexit Express banner, accompanied by a bagpiper, with MEP Jonathan Bullock bearing the Union Jack. Mr Bullock carried the flag to a waiting car, and held it unfurled out of the window.

(While there may be debate over the media’s widespread reference to the Union “Jack”, with some maintaining that that is only correct when the flag is flown on the masthead of ships, and in all other circumstances, it is the Union flag. However, the charity the Flag Institute says that that is a relatively recent distinction and that historically, the Union flag had been called the Union Jack in non-naval situations. Parliamentary record Hansard reports the Earl of Crewe saying in the House of Lords in 1908, for example, that “the Union Jack should be regarded as the National flag, and it undoubtedly may be flown on land by all His Majesty’s subjects”.)

Female MEP called Alexandra Phillips, outgoing MEP for South East England, told euronews: “It’s been a hard battle these past six months — longer than six months — I’ve fought for Brexit for three years.”

“Tomorrow is the dawn of a new day,” Ms Phillips continued, saying: “I’m going to party tonight because I can’t wait for my country to be a free, independent, and great.”

Continue Reading at Breitbart News… 

Democrats Kill Amendment Protecting Americans from Credit Discrimination Based on Politics, Religion

Democrats in the House of Representatives voted on Wednesday against an amendment to a proposed bill that would prevent the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) from forcing credit reporting agencies to evaluate Americans based on political opinions or religious beliefs.

Without such an amendment, Republicans warn, the powerful CFPB would have the legal authority to make nearly any criteria mandatory for a private credit evaluation company to take into consideration, paving the way for a system in which the federal government has the power to assign numerical scores to individuals based on their loyalty to a certain political party, membership in civil society groups that the government approves or disapproves of, or other private behaviors.

The system, they say, would mirror the newly minted “social credit system” in place in China, which bans citizens from key social services like public transportation if they lose too many points behaving in a way the Communist Party disapproves of.

The CFPB, the brainchild of Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), is an executive agency that does not answer to the presidency, making it unaccountable to anyone but its head. The constitutionality of giving an unelected body the power to impose its demands on private individuals and corporations has been the subject of extensive debate, and the unique power given to a bureau director triggered an aggressive fight for the seat after founding director Richard Cordray, chosen by President Barack Obama, resigned.

Republicans moved on Wednesday to amend the 1970 Fair Credit Reporting Act in light of the existence of the CFPB. The failed amendment would have prevented the Bureau from forcing private credit scoring companies to “make use of information related to political opinions, religious expression, or other expression protected by the First Amendment, whether obtained from a social media account of a consumer or other sources.”

The amendment would have been tacked onto Rep. Ayanna Pressley’s (D-MA) Student Borrower Credit Improvement Act, or Comprehensive CREDIT Act of 2020, which grants the CFPB power to order private credit evaluation companies not to take into account what Pressley and her fellow Democrats consider unfair criteria. Having bad credit could keep an American from buying a car or a home, limiting their economic potential. Pressley’s bill would, in particular, prevent unexpected medical expenses or unpaid student loans from harming a person’s credit.

Continue Reading at Breitbart…

HIDDEN CAMERA: Police Interrogate Ezra Levant about his Justin Trudeau Book

Ezra Levant wrote a best-selling book, “The Libranos: What the media won’t tell you about Justin Trudeau’s corruption,” about Justin Trudeau in the last election. After the election, he received a letter by registered mail notifying him that he was being investigated for that book. Trudeau’s elections commissioner claimed it was an illegal campaign activity and demanded that he submit to an interrogation. So he went to Elections Canada’s Ottawa headquarters, where he was grilled for an hour by two 30-year veterans of the RCMP — and they refused to rule out a police raid on Rebel News headquarters!

Rebel News founder Ezra Levant is now under investigation after he was interrogated by former members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, that specialized in terrorism cases, over his best-selling book on Justin Trudeau’s corruption.

The officers, Paul Couture and Timothy Mackin, who are now under contract as investigators with the Commissioner of Canada Elections, didn’t know it at the time, but Levant filmed the entire interrogation, which took place at the high security headquarters of Elections Canada in Ottawa.

Rebel Media reports that Levant received a letter shortly after Christmas which accused him of breaking the law by publishing his book during the election and because he refused to “register” his book with the government. The letter demanded that he meet with investigators or potentially face harsher penalties.

“This is Trudeau’s latest attempt to censor his toughest critics, Rebel News. Remember, Trudeau’s hand-picked election debates commission banned our journalists from covering the election debates. We had to go Federal Court, and a judge ordered Trudeau’s commission to let us in. That victory cost us $18,000 in legal fees,” Levant explained on Rebel Media.

In the hidden camera footage, the officers say that they are there to speak with him about Rebel News. Levant asks them to confirm that none of the other authors who wrote books about Trudeau during the election, which there are 23, are under investigation.

“You call in authors to grill them about a book criticizing your boss — think about who you are,” Levant is heard saying in the footage. “I think there’s going to be a chapter about you two fellas in the next edition.”

Levant says that a senior investigator told him that by publishing his book during an election season he had committed an illegal campaign activity.

“You did a blurb online that I watched, and you speak about, of course, that it was released in time for the election. Which, if that’s your position today, that wouldn’t allow you to have the exemption for advertising for a book,” the interrogator, Couture, is heard saying in the hidden camera footage.

Couture is also heard telling Levant that no recording would be allowed during the interview “because of security features.” Instructions that Levant clearly did not follow.

When Levant asked if he could see the complaint against him, the officers refused.

“To keep the integrity of the investigation right now — you’ll understand that we can’t share everything we have,” the officer says.

“How can I possibly respond to something that you won’t show me?” Levant asks.

Levant also asked who filed the complaint and if it came from someone within the election commission or an outside party. The officer confirmed that the complaint came from an external party.

They would not tell him who made the complaint.

The investigators also asked Levant, who runs a right-wing website, why he hires people who are critical of Trudeau.

“So, for the book, you seek volunteers that, without going back to the tape to get the exact quote, that have certain views on Trudeau and Gerald Butts — and believed in free speech and that were embarrassed by the Prime Minister Trudeau in blackface. You sought that specific type of person, is that correct?” they asked.

The investigators continued to ask why Levant did not register his book with the government, and the author’s response was priceless.

“I thought, the day I register with the government to write a book is the day we are no longer the true north strong and free,” Levant replied, “and if Elections Canada commissioners are stupid enough to prosecute me for writing, publishing and promoting a book about an election during an election — that’s an important fight to have because we need to roll back these pencilneck bureaucrats and their blackface boss. We need to remind them that we are still a free country.”

Levant says that he filmed over an hour of footage and will be releasing it in multiple parts.


Evening News Spin: 100% Negative on Trump Defense, 95% Positive Dems

Before the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald J. Trump was gaveled into session, Chief Justice John Roberts presided over a swearing-in ceremony where all 100 senators pledged to be impartial jurors. The liberal media zeroed in on that pledge and decried Senate Republicans who seemed to be siding with the President.

But a Media Research Center study of broadcast evening news coverage of the opening arguments of both sides, found ABC, CBS, and NBC did not live up to the standard they demanded of Republicans. They gave Democrats double the airtime and showered their arguments with mostly praise, while expressing only criticism of the President’s legal team.

Between Wednesday, January 22, when Democratic House impeachment managers launched their opening arguments, and Tuesday, January 28, when the President’s defense team rested, evening newscast reporters and anchors made a total of 34 evaluative statements about the merits and effectiveness of both sides.

Democratic impeachment managers received a total of 21 evaluative statements from ABC, CBS, and NBC journalists. Of that total, 95 percent of those (20) touted their efforts and presentations, which means only one of their evaluative comments were negative. ABC’s World News Tonight had eight positive comments, CBS Evening News had five, and NBC Nightly News seven. NBC had the lone negative comment.

In stark contrast, every evaluative statement from reporters and anchors about the merits and effectiveness of Trump’s defense team were negative. Of the 13 total statements, ABC and CBS each had five with NBC pitching in with three.

The networks would roundly tear down the arguments Trump’s legal team was making despite the evidence they would present. When Trump lawyer Michael Purpura argued with evidence that the President was long interested in burden-sharing when it came to Ukraine’s defense, CBS chief congressional correspondent Nancy Cordes tried to shoot it down by saying, “Those claims run counter to witness testimony.” A common assertion by the networks.

After the manuscript of former National Security Advisor John Bolton was leaked, Holt announced that the book “contradicts his defense.” Moments later, NBC chief White House correspondent Hallie Jackson seemed to poke at how Trump’s lawyers were addressing senators by not “the elephant in the room.”

On day one on the Democratic arguments, they roundly praised how prosecutors were using the words of the President’s defenders against him. “But Chairman Jerry Nadler tried to dismantle that argument using one of the President’s top defenders to make the case,” said ABC senior congressional correspondent Mary Bruce. CBS Evening News anchor Norah O’Donnell echoed: “House managers laid out their case to remove Mr. Trump from office, at times using his own words against him.”

NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt opened the segment for day two of Democratic arguments by suggesting they were “painting a damning portrait of the President.”

The lone negative evaluation for Democrats came from NBC News political director Chuck Todd on Saturday, January 25, when he shared his frustrations with how the managers seemed to be unable to convince Senate Republicans to vote for more witnesses:

You don’t really any shifts. And if anything, I think before this trial began, I thought they had a good shot at getting witnesses and maybe at least extending this a little bit … I think it’s pretty clear that Mitch McConnell has convinced them … it’s not worth it.”

 Along with that heavy praise for House impeachment managers came a sizable boost in the amount of airtime allowed for their side. More than double, in fact.

In all, the networks covered the Democratic managers for almost 25 minutes (24:57). That’s compared to the 11 minutes and 34 seconds they gave to President Trump’s defense team. The most wildly imbalanced was CBS Evening News, which gave seven minutes, 42 seconds for Democrats and skimped on Trump’s team with two minutes and 26 seconds.

ABC gave Democrats the most time at nine minutes, 25 seconds. Contrast that with the five minutes and 21 seconds they gave the Trump team. NBC allocated seven minutes, 50 seconds for Democrats, while giving three minutes, 47 seconds to the defense.

With the liberal media’s demand that Republicans be impartial in hearing the case, it was clearly more of a ‘do as I say, not as I do’ suggestion.

Editor’s Note: A spokesman for CBS News contacted NewsBusters to insist that the minutes-and-seconds count for CBS did not mention CBS had the only interview with a group of Trump-defending House members.

Source: Newsbusters