Having discovered that “defund the police” wasn’t the sure-fire winner with voters believed to be post-George Floyd, Congressional Democrats have suddenly gone completely the other way by demanding social media companies highlight any and all dirty looks thrown law enforcement’s way after the FBI raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home. From the Washington Post:
House Oversight Committee leaders are demanding social media companies take “immediate action” to address a flood of violent online threats against law enforcement, following the FBI’s search of former president Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.
The lawmakers sent letters Friday to the executives of eight social media companies, including Facebook parent company Meta and the fringe right-wing platform Gab, demanding details about the number of threats against law enforcement. The letters cite a “spike in social media users calling for civil war” and other violence against law enforcement after Trump and some Republican members of Congress lashed out against the FBI.
Now, given that people running their mouths on social media has the exact same effect on actual events and happenings as trying to take out the Rock of Gibraltar with an emery board has on world geography, Congress suddenly being “so concerned” with people badmouthing the FBI would be laughable if it weren’t for the fact that these people are deadly serious. Where was the congressional outrage when, for example, the FBI set up a phony kidnap plot against Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer? And yes, I’m being more than a little facetious here.
Back to the story. Congress wants you to know that they are deeply concerned over people saying bad things against the FBI. You know, the FBI that the majority of Americans now view as being Joe Biden’s private Gestapo?
“We are concerned that reckless statements by the former president and Republican Members of Congress have unleashed a flood of violent threats on social media that have already led to at least one death and pose a danger to law enforcement officers across the United States,” said the letters written by House Oversight Committee Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) and House national security subcommittee Chairman Stephen F. Lynch (D-Mass.). “We urge you to take immediate action to address any threats of violence against law enforcement that appear on your company’s platforms.”
Of course, those in charge should properly investigate credible threats against law enforcement. No one in their right mind, which covers pretty much everybody on the right side of the aisle, is anti-law enforcement. The opposition stems from law enforcement no longer enforcing the law but instead becoming a tool of the ruling party to suppress free speech and the Constitutionally-given guarantee to petition the government for redress of grievances.
One wonders where Rep. Maloney and Lynch were two years ago when The Squad was trying to defund and succeeding in demonizing law enforcement. While this does reinforce the notion that Joe Six-Pack (and we’re not talking abs) venting on Twitter or variations thereof carries more weight than AOC & Co. in terms of shaping public opinion, it’s also a tad curious how selective Congressional members can be in determining what is and isn’t acceptable speech. Be back in a second while I ice down my overheating facetiousness generator.
Ironically — or not — it’s the “fringe” site that’s being the most cooperative.
Gab CEO Andrew Torba responded to The Washington Post’s request for comment with links to a pair of blog posts, including one where Gab said it is “considering” its response to Congress and that it quickly responded to law enforcement requests related to the Pennsylvania arrest. The seven other companies did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Since this story comes from the Washington Post, naturally, Post’s gonna Post.
House Democrats are scrutinizing the renewed online calls for violence against law enforcement as they grapple with the role that social media played in fomenting the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
Deadly to Ashli Babbitt, yes.
Once again, the Democrats’ inability to read the room has risen to the top. It is painfully apparent that the Democratic Congressional majority, knowing its time is short, can and is doing anything possible to drum up fear that the evil Republicans are going to march everybody off to reeducation camps should they retake control of Congress this November. The problem is that the medium used to get the message is the same media nobody watches or reads. So, naturally, they are also attempting to squelch social media-provided free speech.
Again, no one in their right mind on the right condones threats of violence against law enforcement. As my colleague Bonchie said immediately following the Mar-a-Lago raid, we know better.
Now is not the time to play into the hands of our opponents, and you will not beat the FBI and these other corrupt institutions via disorganized attacks from the outside, no matter how good it might feel in the short term. A red line was crossed with this raid on Trump’s home, and electoral vengeance is justified. But it must come in ways that are actually effective, and that means being strategic and playing the long game. It’s going to take a Republican Congress in 2023 and a Republican president in 2025 to make any headway against this insanity. There is no other way, and once the tables are turned, any Republican politician who doesn’t have the stomach to fight back must be banished.
Instead, the proposal is law enforcement oversight to ensure it acts responsibly. After all, isn’t this precisely what everybody was screaming for during BLM’s nights spent luxuriating in various burning building’s glow?