Missouri v. Biden exposes media’s falsehoods on Big Tech’s conservative censorship.

Corporate media mocked widespread conservative outrage over online censorship as a “baseless” and misdirected ploy to gin up controversy and votes, but Missouri v. Biden proves Big Tech and the federal government colluded to suppress “millions of protected free speech postings by American citizens.”

There is hardly a lack of proof that Americans were the subject of years of government-led partisan purges on Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms.

Emails, documents, files, and statements show that it was often at the prompting of federal agencies such as the Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Census Bureau, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, the FBI, and the Department of Justice, as well as the White House, that Big Tech effectively silenced the voices of countless Americans on Covid-19, elections, and criticism of the Biden regime.

In his 155-page memorandum ruling handed down on July 4, Judge Terry Doughty, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, asserted that the attorneys general who brought the case will likely see victory in court with their claim that “the United States Government, through the White House and numerous federal agencies, pressured and encouraged social-media companies to suppress free speech.”

“Defendants used meetings and communications with social-media companies to pressure those companies to take down, reduce, and suppress the free speech of American citizens. They flagged posts and provided information on the type of posts they wanted suppressed. They also followed up with directives to the social-media companies to provide them with information as to action the company had taken with regard to the flagged post,” Doughty confirmed.

U.S. media should care about preserving the same constitutional amendment that protects their existence.

Instead, outlets repeatedly insisted that online censorship — like critical race theory and mutilative gender experiments on minors — simply wasn’t happening. Any documented instances of muzzling, outlets claimed, only affected a few people and didn’t violate the First Amendment.

Even before lockdowns, BLM riots, and the 2020 election, corporate media outlets were smearing conservative claims of Big Tech censorship.

“Google and Facebook aren’t infringing on the right’s freedom of expression, but insisting otherwise is politically convenient,” the Atlantic asserted in 2019.

One year after the Atlantic claimed “there is no evidence” that Americans were suffering suppression of online speech, Pew Research found that “most Americans think social media sites censor political viewpoints.”

American suspicions that the government was involved in the censorship industrial complex only grew and were later confirmed by the “Twitter Files.” When corporate media weren’t ignoring the “Twitter Files” completely, outlets “repeatedly rolled eyes, dismissed, and mocked [the revelations of censorship] as a nothingburger.”

Meanwhile, the Biden administration feigned innocence about its role in limiting Americans’ speech at the same time it was expanding its efforts to muzzle citizens. Corporate media proudly participated in blackouts on information like the Hunter Biden laptop, and other Democrats also joined in the smear campaign.

“It may be possible — if we can take off the tinfoil hat — that there is not a vast conspiracy,” Democrat Rep. Colin Allred of Texas said after the release of the “Twitter Files.”

Missouri v. Biden didn’t uncover a couple of instances of accidental deplatforming, as Big Tech, corporate media, and the Biden White House so often like to claim. Doughty confirmed that attorneys general provided “substantial evidence in support of their claims that they were the victims of a far-reaching and widespread censorship campaign.”

Not only that, but Doughty agreed that Big Tech’s decision to take down “Opposition to COVID-19 vaccines; opposition to COVID-19 masking and lockdowns; opposition to the lab-leak theory of COVID-19; opposition to the validity of the 2020 election; opposition to President Biden’s policies; statements that the Hunter Biden laptop story was true; and opposition to policies of the government officials in power” at the behest of the government appears blatantly partisan.

“It is quite telling that each example or category of suppressed speech was conservative in nature. This targeted suppression of conservative ideas is a perfect example of viewpoint discrimination of political speech,” Doughty wrote. “American citizens have the right to engage in free debate about the significant issues affecting the country.”

The First Amendment, Doughty wrote, was designed to protect an “uninhibited marketplace of ideas in which truth will ultimately prevail.” Yet, for years now, the federal government and Big Tech, with cover from corporate media, have repeatedly violated Americans’ right to that “uninhibited marketplace.”