Image from https://twitter.com/ltthompso/status/1096407289513365504

One of the bizarre, communist-like phenomenons associated with New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez bursting onto the national stage as the thought leader for the modern Democrat party is the menagerie of supporters, left and right, that cluster about her, like a herd of musk oxen protecting a treasured calf, to ward off all criticism. On the right side, we’ve been lectured by all manner of big-brained thinkers on how wrong it is to criticize a member of congress for being a moron because, apparently, the more you criticize them the stronger they get and the more credible they become.

Her defenders on the left are a different breed. Dimmer and more vicious that the thirty-something failed males who longingly hope if they White Knight Ocasio Cortez enough that she might recognize them on Twitter and who knows where that would lead, these paladins try to bring the power of online platforms and advertising groups to bear to defend the precious.

A few days ago, Ace and Ace of Spades, was the target:

Yesterday, Ace’s post about Cortez was flagged for “violating industry standards”—almost certainly by that dumb communist’s Red Guard of DCA goons.

When nearly all silicon valley employees support her, what action will they take against her people? 0. https://t.co/S94eFXPc2n

— David Reaboi (@davereaboi) February 15, 2019

It just so happens that yesterday’s post on this very blog about AOC got flagged as “violating industry standards.” In the headline, I said she’d “queered the Amazon deal,” using the verb “to queer” meaning “to spoil the effect or success of.” But someone decided to pretend this was a gay slur, and demanded that the post be edited, or else I’d get banned from advertising.

Was it one of AOC’s goons? I can’t imagine who else would flag such an inoffensive post, except someone who is determined that no criticism of the stone-cold stupid socialist wondergirl will be tolerated.

#MuhPrivateBusinessDecisions though, right, TruCons…? Not ever going to be any pushback against this coordinated effort to end free speech, right?

Yesterday, National Review’s Luke Thompson discovered for himself how problematic it can be to post anything unflattering about Ocasio Cortez.

Thompson made the claim, true or not, that Ocasio Cortez had put her boyfriend on the payroll as a member of her staff. He used as evidence the publicly available, House of Representatives email directory and linked to it in a tweet.

So to recap, a member of the public asked @AOC why her boyfriend is listed as staff in a public document and Twitter locked him out for asking. Don't be impertinent to powerful public officials on Twitter, folks! https://t.co/uLcg6RhZJ9

— Kyle Smith (@rkylesmith) February 15, 2019

By the way, you pathetic losers who have the unrequited hots for Ocasio Cortez, this is your competition:

He's the tall fellow with the beard in the back. You can read all about their romance in this Marie Claire puff piece. https://t.co/Q2CTWRtlGG pic.twitter.com/pAAORhgtYn

— Luke Thompson (@ltthompso) February 15, 2019

There is some possiblity that Thompson may be wrong. Another of Ocasio Cortez’s White Knights at the Washington Post, some guy named Reis Thebault, claims

Well, they’re partly correct. Roberts does have a House email address, but, as a spokesperson for the chamber’s Office of the Chief Administrative Officer explained, that does not mean he’s an employee.

“From time to time, at the request of members, spouses and partners are provided House email accounts for the purposes of viewing the member’s calendar,” the spokesperson said.

On Twitter, Ocasio-Cortez made the same point — that allowing partners access to members’ schedules through House email accounts is commonplace and is not against any government rules — telling Thompson to “check your facts before you tweet nonsense.”

Her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, told The Post that, “Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s partner, Mr. Roberts, has no official position, paid or otherwise, with her congressional office. Members of Congress have very tightly scheduled calendars that their family members and partners are allowed to access to make personal plans around official schedules.”

The sum total of the evidence here is a) a spokesman for the House’s chief administrative officer saying that could be the case and b) Ocasio Cortez’s chief of staff denying the story. What is notable is that no one decided to release a roster of her staff and the House directory shows that Ocasio Cortez’s main squeeze is listed as part of her transition team.

New from a friend inside the House. Seems like more than calendar access to me. Care to revise your statement @AOC? pic.twitter.com/Sr2HAUOkW7

— Luke Thompson (@ltthompso) February 15, 2019

And there are unconfirmed reports that he was on the payroll of Ocasio Cortez’s campaign.

It appears that Thompson successfully appealed because the offending tweets and more like it have reappeared.

While you were having a nice Valentine's Day, @AOC decided to put her boyfriend on staff – drawing a salary on the taxpayer's dime. Nice to see her adapting to the swamp so quickly. pic.twitter.com/bvncwzxY53

— Luke Thompson (@ltthompso) February 15, 2019

But it shows the dangerous cult of personality that Ocasio Cortez is cultivating as her first line of defense against transparency and criticism. If it abundantly clear that Ocasio Cortez’s chief of staff was a prime mover in getting Thompson’s account locked and leads and/or encouraged her herd of winged monkeys to wage war on Thompson.

Listing an official U.S. House of Representatives email address is doxxing? Also, did you or someone in the AOC office report Luke to Twitter?

— Kyle Smith (@rkylesmith) February 15, 2019

It also shows just how enslaved Twitter is to the progressive agenda that it would lock down an account for literally publishing a link to a government telephone directory.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.
Follow @streiffredstate

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========