Death of Michael Stenger

Sticky#J6, ,

Michael C. Stenger was the Sergeant at Arms of the US Senate on January 6, 2021. He died in the morning of June 27, according to the press reports.

The first public disclosure of Stenger’s death happened no later than on June 27 at 1:11pm ET (DC time here and elsewhere in this article). It was in Wikipedia article Michael C. Stenger by the user Mmmerlot on June 27 at 1:11pm ET. The only change was “is” to “was” in the sentence “Michael C. Stenger is an American law enforcement officer”. Mmmerlot made another change in that article 10 minutes later. The account Mmmerlot has been deleted by 8pm despite its long history on Wikipedia.

The next edit was by the user with IP address 156.33.241.77 on June 27 at 2:38pm. It added the date of the death: “death_date = June 27, 2022“. It was correctly marked “U.S. Congress edit“. Indeed, this IP address belongs to a block, owned by the Senate. This edit was reversed about a minute later from the same IP address.

See Wikipedia history of this page for more info. Remember that Wikipedia can delete versions from its history. The Wikipedia dates are in Zulu time; deduct 5 hours to get DC time.

There was a string of poorly explained deaths and suicides among USCP officers who took part in the events of January 6.

work in progress

Pelosi Putsch – Capitol Building, Jan 6

Sticky#J6, 18 USC Ch. 115, dems, L0, ,

On January 6, a joint session of Congress assembled to hear challenges to electors in six contested states, to count the correct electoral votes, and to certify the results of the Presidential election. It seems that Democrats feared that this constitutional procedure would end up certifying the re-election of President Trump. To prevent this, they launched a putsch attempt, intended to force Congress to certify Joe Biden as the next president.

To accomplish this, democrat leaders used the Trump rally, which was being held on the same day. I was at the rally and I saw no one being aggressive or interpreting Trump’s speech as a call to violence. My eyewitness account matches those of many others, who were also present at the rally and state that the attendees were calm and non-violent. Continue reading Pelosi Putsch – Capitol Building, Jan 6 →

Post Elections View of the Pandemic

Sticky18 USC Ch. 115, Big Tech, dems, healthcare, L0, ,

There are many effective treatments & prophylaxis for the Wuhan virus disease; some were known from the beginning of the pandemic (HCQ, convalescent plasma), others appeared later (IVM, monoclonal antibodies, Regeneron cocktail, and more). All of them have been rejected by the self-proclaimed C19 Treatment Guidelines Panel, propped-up by Big Tech and MSM. They even went as far as effectively banning the use of any of these prophylaxis and treatments, intimidating hospitals into not using them, and deplatforming practicing doctors, who were using and advocating for such therapies.

Big Tech, MSM and Democrat leaders delayed the approval of the vaccine. By September 2020, Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine had been successfully tested on thousands of volunteers, manufactured in mass quantities, and was ready for wide-spread use. Pfizer was even forced to delay announcing their successful Phase 3 trials, until after the election day. Continue reading Post Elections View of the Pandemic →

Big Tech platforms run on Users Private Property – First Amendment Protects Users

anti-social media, Big Tech,

The First Amendment protects citizen’s speech , not the Big Tech platforms who interfere with that speech. Contrary to what they claim, the platforms run on their user’s private property.

Re: NetChoice v. Paxton

● The Platforms cannot Claim First Amendment Protection for Their Conduct on Consumers’ Property, including Consumers’ Content and Private Information

● The Platforms are Consumer Services Providers, not Speakers

● Physical Access to Consumers’ Speech is NOT Permission to Editorialize

● The Platforms’ Terms of Service are Invalid

● The Platforms are NOT Even “Like Media”

● The Platforms are NOT Authorized to Access Consumers’ Computers for Editorializing

● The Platforms’ Apps are Physically Installed on Consumers’ Smartphones

● The Platforms are NOT Granted Copyright License for Editorializing

● The Platforms are contractors for the Texas government, which has multiple accounts with them. Texas has the right and obligation to protect its residents, interacting with these accounts, against discrimination by the platforms.

SCOTUS-Platforms-v-Texas–Argument2  contains a more complete argument.

Originally published on 2022-06-02. Updated on 2022-06-08.

Draft

uncategorized, ,

Big Social media platforms abandoned  Section 230 protections in the latest SCOTUS application (NetChoice LLC v. Paxton): “From the moment users access a social media platform, everything they see is subject to editorial discretion by the platform in accordance with the platforms’ unique policies.”

Of course, trespass, fraud, & sabotage of their consumer is not “editorial discretion”. But they admitted that they show consumers information that they create, not information received from 3rd parties.

 

 

Obama Administration Hand Picked Big Tech Winners

18 USC Ch. 115, anti-social media, Big Tech, dems, L0, ,

2022-06-05 update: Leaked Docs Show Obama FTC Gave Google Its Monopoly After Google Execs Helped Obama Get Re-Elected (The Federalist, March 2021)

New Tool Unmasks Big Tech’s Social Media Sock Puppets (The Federalist, July 2021)

Big Tech, Big Cash. lobbying and campaign contributions from  Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google (Public Citizen, March 2021). End of the update.

The current crop of the Big Tech social media platforms blossomed under the Obama administration. During Obama’s terms, the US government  created thousands of accounts on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube etc. Ordinary citizens reasonable assumed that this massive governmental presence indicates that these platforms are state actors obligated to be politically neutral, and joined them in droves. Over time, these platforms became a public forum and the main channel of communication between the government and the public. Continue reading Obama Administration Hand Picked Big Tech Winners →

Obama Administration Sold the United States to Big Tech

anti-social media, Big Tech, dems, L0, , ,

By Assenting to Big Tech TOS with Only Minor Changes

Under the Obama administration, the federal government assented to Terms of Service of social media platforms and created multiple accounts on some of them. It used Big Tech standard terms with minimal changes, despite the vast difference of the bargaining power of the federal government and an ordinary user. It also called them “negotiated agreements”, purporting to put the federal government in worse legal position than an ordinary user, protected by the legal theory of contracts of adhesion.

The difference of the “negotiated agreements” from the standard TOS were mostly removal or restriction of indemnity and forum selection clauses. Some agreements restricted platforms’ ability to use the US symbols for self-promotion and to place ads the government content. Almost all other one-sided clauses remained, including the following:

  • The US government is obligated to comply with content guidelines, policies, and rules of the platforms, even when they change.
  • The platforms can change their terms, conditions, policies, and rules at any time
  • The platforms can delete any content of any government account at whim or on slim pretext, without notice to the public
  • The platforms can delete any government account with short or no notice
  • The platforms can manipulate incoming and outgoing information, to and from the government accounts
  • The platforms own copyright for any collection of government content

Continue reading Obama Administration Sold the United States to Big Tech →

Appeals Court Clears Texas Law against Big Tech Censorship

anti-social media, Big Tech, winning, ,

2022-05-31: Bad News. SCOTUS vacated the 5th circuit ruling. The majority decision is not published yet. Dissent written by Justice Alito

Great news! The 5th Circuit court has stayed the preliminary injunction against Texas law against political censorship by Big Tech (Bill HB 20).

One page decision: Texas-Appelant-Motion-Granted.pdf

I guess, Big Tech has plenty of cards up its sleeves, so use the opportunity now.

Big Tech Terms of Service are Void

anti-social media, Big Tech, L0,

Terms of Service (TOS), user agreements, and other purported contracts between Big Tech corporations and end users are invalid and void. Neither clicking buttons Sign up or I Agree next to these TOSes nor using their services creates a contract between the corporation and the user, at least on the terms written by these corporations, especially Big Tech Social Media Platforms (“BTP”).

The substance of the Big Tech TOS violates multiple conditions necessary to form a valid contract. Continue reading Big Tech Terms of Service are Void →

Biden-Burisma, Brennan, Bandera – Which is the Reason for Confronting Russia Now?

#spygate, 18 USC Ch. 115, dems, Ukraine,

Russia did not interfere in the 2016 US presidential election in favor of Donald Trump. It was the other way around: Russia opposed Trump’s election. From an article in RT.com (May 6, 2016): “Donald Trump: More Caligula than Augustus … America’s answer to Mussolini, and just like the Italian fascist dictator”. Democrats should be happy now. Republicans do not need to prove to anyone that they are not soft on Russia. Continue reading Biden-Burisma, Brennan, Bandera – Which is the Reason for Confronting Russia Now? →

Ukraine Language Law

#spygate, Ukraine, ,

Are you sure that the Kyiv regime is democratic? Are you sure that accusations of Nazism have no merit whatsoever? We might be not even on the side of good guys.

The Ukraine Language Law of 2019 is so shocking that you need to read it to believe. The linked document contains excerpts from it with English translation.

The previous administration, which passed this anomalous law, lost in a landslide to Vladimir Zelensky, who promised to apply it only in accordance with the Ukrainian constitution (i.e., not to apply).

But the defeated regime, using its agents in the US (including Burisma network, Eric Ciaramella, Alexander Vindman, not sure about Sean Misco and Alexandra Chalupa), undermined Zelensky on the main front – his administration’ relations with the US. Remember “whistleblower” hoax after the phone call between Trump and Zelensky in July 2019? That and the following impeachment hearing made it impossible for Trump to provide more aid to Ukraine, such as brokering the best possible peace deal with Russia.

Those hoax and impeachment hearing in the US have undermined Zelensky’s positions in Ukraine in favor of the ultranationalists and outright neo-nazis. One might guess that outside PR, Zelensky has very few powers now.

Social Media Censorship is not Speech

anti-social media, Big Tech, ,

(updated) My Amicus Brief filing in 5th Court of Appeals Docket # 21-51178 NetChoice v. Paxton Appeal by TX AG Paxton of preliminary injunction against Texas anti-social medial censorship bill H.B.20.

Amicus-Brief-NetChoice-v-Paxton-2022-03-unofficial.pdf

Social media platforms are not media, but platforms used by the users to communicate with each other and to create media.  Platforms themselves are not media companies, but telecommunications services providers. The Platforms have never marketed themselves as media, press, or publishers.

Platforms operate under their contracts (which are to be constructed by courts in each separate case; their terms of service are illegal and invalid) with the users and consumer protection laws.

Platforms are state actors, and must respect the First Amendment rights of their users. Most of the censorship by the Platforms lacks necessary communicative elements to even claim the First Amendment protection. Continue reading Social Media Censorship is not Speech →

Bucha Massacre has NOT happened

L1, Ukraine, ,

Also, the Tochka-U missile with a cluster warhead, which hit the Kramatorsk train station on April 8, killing more than 50 , was likely launched by the Ukrainian military (thread 1, using source thread 2; 3).  The words  “for the children” (meaning “revenge for the children”) were written in Russian on the engine of the missile. – same day update

My article Was there really a massacre at Bucha? (the answer is NO) was published in the American Thinker yesterday.

The inaccurate translation of Russian “братские могилы” (“brotherly graves”) as “mass graves” contributed to the confusion. In Russia & Ukraine, brotherly graves are used in war time to bury dead honorably.

Vysotsky, Brotherly Graves (song):

Continue reading Bucha Massacre has NOT happened →