Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has been at the forefront of uncovering the truth behind all the red tape in Washington surrounding COVID-19. To be sure, his work has been nothing short of shocking, and in a just world, the press would be taking the information he’s uncovering and spreading it on every working screen and speaker across America.

But it’s not. Instead, the people who have control of these screens do their best to ignore, wrongfully discredit, or in YouTube’s case, censor him.

YouTube took down a couple of Paul’s videos where just last week, he spoke to a Newsmax journalist on several topics including the “science behind masks.” YouTube removed the video and suspended his account from posting anything for seven days. As Paul said, YouTube’s reasoning was that he had posted something that went against the government narrative on COVID-19.

It is confirmed by some sources that Paul is a member of the government.

Paul also uploaded another video titled “It Is Time For Unfiltered News” also for violating community guidelines according to YouTube.

Since he can no longer upload to YouTube, for the time being, Paul took to Rumble and uploaded the now-deleted video there explaining what happened between him and YouTube and why they took down his video; speaking of scientific studies having to do with mask-wearing. Some of it was inconvenient to the Democrat narrative, and so it had to go.

The Daily Wire reported that Paul was on a press call earlier today and had some comments about YouTube’s moves against him:

“I’m not sure when YouTube became an arm of the government, and I’m not really sure it’s good for journalism to also be an arm of the government without any repercussions or push back,” Senator Paul said.

While some conservative voices are calling for Big Tech to be reined in through various forms of legislative action, Senator Paul discussed an alternative approach.

“My hope is that maybe through competition we’ll prove them to be wrong in their ways,” he said.

Paul continued by pointing out that he is a free-market idealist and that he believes private companies should be able to suspend him from their platforms if they so choose, but note that this is still an attack on free speech:

“As a libertarian-leaning Senator, I think private companies have the right to ban me if they want to, but I think it is really anti-free speech, anti-progress of science, which involves skepticism and argumentation to arrive at the truth,” Senator Paul said. “We realize this in our court systems that both sides present facts on either side of a question and complete an adversarial process to reach the truth in each case.”

Senator Paul then moved to link this debate to the field of journalism.

“Journalism isn’t far from that and in some ways, the adversarial part of the courtroom is ideally what you would find in journalism, where both sides would present facts, there is a period of argumentation and people figure out the truth for themselves,” he said. “YouTube and Google though, have become an entity so huge that they think they are the arbitrator of truth.”

Two points here.

For one, as Paul pointed out, YouTube has become an arm of the government and that shouldn’t be a thing. The control of information to one political party means that only propaganda supporting one side, at least on certain topics, is allowed. This ceases making YouTube a platform and more of a publisher with platform characteristics.

Secondly, what entities like YouTube and other big tech companies seem to want to promote is the “government” narrative, but it’s very shady about what it defines as government. Paul is a government figure doing scientific research and he’s being silenced. It would appear that the only government entity YouTube wants to promote as truthful is the entity it agrees with. If tomorrow Republicans miraculously seized the White House, House, and Senate, it’s highly doubtful that YouTube would adjust its standing on things as the government begins injecting real science into the conversation.

There is no adherence to “government.” There should be none in the first place. This is adherence to “ideology.”