Category Archives: 1st amendment

DHS Creating “Disinformation Governance Board” Ahead Of Midterms

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is creating a “Disinformation Governance Board” to control narratives combat whatever they deem ‘misinformation’ before the 2022 midterms and beyond.

According to Politico, the new entity will focus on “misinformation related to homeland security, focused specifically on irregular migration and Russia.”

It will be headed by Nina Jankowicz, who previously served as a disinformation fellow at the Wilson Center, and advised the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry as part of the Fulbright-Clinton Public Policy Fellowship. She also oversaw the Russia and Belarus programs at the National Democratic Institute.

She also sings erotic Harry Potter songs.

“The goal is to bring the resources of (DHS) together to address this threat,” said DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas during Wednesday testimony.

News of the DHS entity comes just days after Elon Musk secured a $44 billion deal to buy Twitter, which he’s vowed to change into a free speech platform within the bounds of the law.

As PJ Media notes:

Jankowicz has written two books, How to Lose the Information War and How to Be A Woman Online. In a pinned tweet pimping her newly released second book, Jankowiz lets her inner misandry loose and writes, “Men ‘burst violently into your mentions and your life like the Kool-aid man, demanding your attention, hawking opinions that they believe are unarguably, manifestly correct and indispensable.’”

As a thought experiment – what do you think the “Disinformation Governance Board” would have done with the Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 US election – which Democratic politicians and dozens of former intelligence officials swore had “all the hallmarks” of a Russian disinformation campaign – a claim which turned out to be misinformation itself?

Robert Reich: Former Trilateral Commission Member Goes Full Anti-Free Speech

Legal icon Jonathan Turley takes Robert Reich to task on his anti-free speech screed. Reich is a prominent, former member of the Trilateral Commission. An academic, he has floated in and out of government for 45 years and was named by Time magazine as one of the “Ten Best Cabinet Members” of the century in 2008. — Technocracy News & Trends Editor Patrick Wood

By: Jonathan Turley

We recently discussed the gathering of Democratic politicians and media figures at the University of Chicago to discuss how to better shape news, combat “disinformation,” and reeducate those with conservative views. The political and media elite shared ideas on how to expand censorship and control what people read or viewed in the news. The same figures are now alarmed that Elon Musk could gain greater influence over Twitter and, perish the thought, restore free speech protections to the site. The latest is former labor secretary under President Clinton, Robert Reich, who wrote a perfectly Orwellian column in the Guardian titled “Elon Musk’s vision for the internet is dangerous nonsense.” However, the column offers an insight into the anti-free speech mentality that has taken hold of the Democratic party and the mainstream media.

Musk is an advocate for free speech on the Internet. Like some of us, he is an Internet originalist. That makes him an existential threat for those who have long used “disinformation” as an excuse to silence dissenting views in the media and on social media.

Twitter has gone from denial of seeking to shape speech on the Internet to embracing that function. After the old Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was criticized for his massive censorship efforts, Twitter replaced him with CEO Parag Agrawal who has expressed chilling anti-free speech sentiments. In an interview with Technology Review editor-in-chief Gideon Lichfield, he was asked how Twitter would balance its efforts to combat misinformation with wanting to “protect free speech as a core value” and to respect the First Amendment.  Agrawal responded;

“Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation. The kinds of things that we do about this is, focus less on thinking about free speech, but thinking about how the times have changed.

One of the changes today that we see is speech is easy on the internet. Most people can speak. Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard. The scarce commodity today is attention. There’s a lot of content out there. A lot of tweets out there, not all of it gets attention, some subset of it gets attention.”

He added that Twitter would be “moving towards how we recommend content and … how we direct people’s attention is leading to a healthy public conversation that is most participatory.”

Reich lays that agenda bare in his column while condemning free speech advocates as petty tyrants oppressing people through freedom.

Reich explains that it is not about freedom but tyranny. More free speech means less freedom. It is the type of argument commonly used in China and other authoritarian nations–and an increasing number of American academics and writers. Indeed, his column is reminiscent of the professors who have called for the adoption of the Chinese model for censoring views on the Internet.

In an article published in The Atlantic by Harvard law professor Jack Goldsmith and University of Arizona law professor Andrew Keane Woods called for Chinese-style censorship of the internet, stating that “in the great debate of the past two decades about freedom versus control of the network, China was largely right and the United States was largely wrong.”

Reich tells people not to be lured by freedom of speech: “Musk says he wants to ‘free’ the internet. But what he really aims to do is make it even less accountable than it is now.” What Reich refers to as “accountability” is being accountable to those like himself who can filter out views and writings that are deemed harmful for readers.

Reich then goes full Orwellian:

“Musk advocates free speech but in reality it’s just about power. Power compelled Musk to buy $2.64bn of Twitter stock, making him the largest individual shareholder.”

Reich insists that censorship of views like former President Donald Trump are “necessary to protect American democracy.” Get it? Less freedom is more freedom.

Read full story here…

Colorado State Offers Counseling To Help Students Cope With The Horrors of Free Speech

Amber Crawford 
Jan 31, 2022

Colorado State University (CSU) has placed signs around campus that list resources for students to seek help if they have been triggered by free speech.

These signs read, “If you (or someone you know) are affected by a free speech event on campus, here are some resources…” The sign then lists 17 departments/resources that both the students and faculty can contact if they have been triggered by free speech on CSU’s campus.

This type of initiative encourages college students to act like it is harmful to them to hear someone disagreeing with their political views. CSU is validating the self-victimization of young adults, and encouraging students to fear free speech and think of it as dangerous. Instead of preparing its students for the real world, the university is teaching its students that different opinions are negative things and instead of being intelligent confronted and/or dealt with, they should instead seek counseling.

Trending: BREAKING: Dinesh D’Souza Releases BOMBSHELL Movie Trailer Revealing “2000 Mules” Who Stole the 2020 Election

This image was initially posted to Instagram by Turning Point USA’s local chapter. The conservative student organization accused the school of intolerance with the caption, “And we haven’t even had an event yet gotta love the intolerance of @coloradostateuniversity”

Back in October, CSU sent out an email threatening to arrest the unvaccinated students if they are caught on school property without first submitting proof of vaccination or being approved for a vaccine exemption.

As Big Tech Censored Doctors and Scientists, 2021 Set a Record for Child Sexual Abuse on Their Platforms

Matt Agorist 
January 22, 2022

Originally Published @ The Free Thought Project

Last month, Twitter permanently banned Dr. Robert Malone — who has widely been credited with inventing the mRNA technology used in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 immunizations. Following the Twitter ban, Dr. Malone appeared on the Joe Rogan podcast, in one of the most viral episodes ever. That podcast and all subsequent clips were then banned from YouTube.

Malone wasn’t inciting hatred toward groups of people or calling for an overthrow of the US government. He was merely presenting facts that were inconvenient to the established narrative, and for this, he was memory-holed by the arbiters of information in big tech.

Peaceful discourse over the last two years has become an enemy to the status quo. No longer can the plebes question their rulers on official channels. Instead, they are pushed to the outskirts of the internet and logical well-formed arguments are then mixed in with dark and ridiculous conspiracy theories in what appears to be a deliberate act to stifle free thought.

Dr. Malone was just one of many esteemed minds who have been unceremoniously silenced into oblivion by big tech as these information controllers delete content that runs counter to their narrative. They claim this mass censorship and narrative control is carried out to keep you safe. But as a recent report from The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) illustrates, as big tech clamps down on free speech, they allow child sexual abuse to not only spread — but flourish.

According to the  new data from IWF, online sexual exploitation of 7-10 year olds exploded in 2021 with a 300% increase.  This increase was part of a record-breaking number of child sexual abuse images being transferred and exchanged on platforms who rampantly censor doctors and scientists for challenging the status quo.

Thanks to government imposed lockdowns and “virtual learning” more children were online last year, which increased their odds of encountering sexual predators.

According to IWF, the foundation received more complaints about child sexual abuse images, also known as child pornography, in 2021, than they have in the last 15 years combined.

Social media sites like Facebook and Twitter are increasingly being used by child predators for grooming and sexual exploitation, according to the data — even children who parents may consider “too young” to be in danger.

As advocacy group, Parents Together Action points out, while parents are a critical part of keeping kids safe online, tech platforms also need to address the massive and growing problem of online child sexual abuse. The IWF data is Europe-centric data about an international problem, which US-based tech companies have a unique opportunity to protect children from.

Unfortunately, however, these tech companies are seemingly more concerned with banning folks for questioning the safety of vaccinations and covid protocols than they are with protecting children — and the data proves it.

Not only are these companies not interested in stopping child sex abuse on their platforms, but as TFTP reported, they are profiting from it. While banning those who question the status quo, Twitter is alleged in a lawsuit to have victimized children by knowingly allowing a video of them to go viral.

The victims sued the platform alleging that it benefitted financially by failing to remove the video featuring the children — which was retweeted thousands of times and garnered nearly 200,000 views.

To be clear, this was not a mistake that simply didn’t pick up on the nature of the content. The boy and his mother, according to the lawsuit, repeatedly contacted Twitter about the content, but the social media giant allegedly didn’t suspend accounts distributing it until a federal agent from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) intervened.

In fact, according to the lawsuit, Twitter even responded to the boy and his mother via email and said the child porn did not violate its policies. According to the suit, an email shows Twitter telling John Doe on Jan. 28, 2020, that it “reviewed the content, and didn’t find a violation of our policies, so no action will be taken at this time.”

“What do you mean you don’t see a problem?” the minor asks in a response that same day. “We both are minors right now and were minors at the time these videos were taken. We both were 13 years of age.”

A subsequent screen shot shows that the video accumulated 167,000 views within a day and received more than 2,200 retweets and 6,640 likes.

Facebook is just as guilty.

As Facebook moves the needle on censorship of free speech to an all time high, last year, they were sued in the Texas Supreme Court for allowing child predators to groom and recruit children for sex-trafficking.

The group sued Facebook for negligence and product liability, saying that Facebook failed to warn about or attempt to prevent sex trafficking from taking place on its internet platforms. The suits also alleged that Facebook benefited from the sexual exploitation of trafficking victims, according to a report in the Houston Chronicle.

The three victims accused Facebook of “running “an unrestricted platform to stalk, exploit, recruit, groom, and extort children into the sex trade.” One was 15 when an older man contacted her on Facebook, offered her a modeling job, photographed her, posted the pictures on the now-defunct BackPage website, and prostituted her to other men, leading her to be “raped, beaten, and forced into further sex trafficking.” The other two girls were 14, and reported almost identical experiences, with one openly pimped out for “dates” on Instagram, a Facebook subsidiary,” Graham Dockery explained.

Facebook lawyers argued the company was shielded from liability under Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, which states that what users say or write online is not akin to a publisher conveying the same message.

This should totally be the case, but if Facebook can claim Section 230 on child trafficking, then why do they target and eliminate political speech so viciously? If Facebook does not act as a neutral party and removes peaceful anti-establishment content, they have no legal basis to claim entitlement under Section 230. Neither does Twitter.

As the great purge of anti-establishment views continues, remember that these companies who claim they have your best interests in mind, are deleting potentially life-saving discourse while child predators thrive on their platforms.

For Whom it May Concern: Trump’s New Social Media App Now Has A Launch Date

OPINION: This article contains commentary which reflects the author’s opinion

Carmine Sabia
January 7th, 2022

It is one of the announcements from former President Donald Trump that his supporters have been waiting for and he has finally made it.

No, not that one.

But it is game-changing for the world of social media. The 45th President of the United States has announced that his media company, the Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG), is going to launch his new social media app on President’s Day, The Guardian reported.

Photos show that the app is going to be similar o Twitter in that it is set to have trending topics and the ability to follow other people.

The app will launch 13 months after the former president was permanently banned from Twitter and banned indefinitely from Facebook.

TMTG and Apple did not respond to requests for comment, but a source familiar with the matter confirmed that 21 February is the planned launch date of the app.

The launch is expected to be the first of three stages in TMTG’s development. The second would be a subscription video-on-demand service called TMTG+ with entertainment, news and podcasts, according to the company website. A November investor presentation indicated that TMTG also wants to launch a podcast network.

TMTG is currently valued at $4.3bn based on the stock price of Digital World Acquisition Corp. TMTG agreed in October to merge with the blank-check firm at a valuation of $875m.

Trump supporters and retail investors have snapped up Digital World’s stock, betting that Trump’s popularity with his Republican political base will translate into a commercial runaway success.

In June, Facebook made a decision as regards Trump being allowed to come back to the platform.

Facebook’s vice president of global affairs Nick Clegg issued a blog post announcing a minimum two-year ban for Trump, Politico reported.

“Given the gravity of the circumstances that led to Mr. Trump’s suspension, we believe his actions constituted a severe violation of our rules which merit the highest penalty available under the new enforcement protocols,” he said. “We are suspending his accounts for two years, effective from the date of the initial suspension on January 7 this year.”

“We are suspending his accounts for two years, effective from the date of the initial suspension on January 7 this year,” it said.

“We are today announcing new enforcement protocols to be applied in exceptional cases such as this, and we are confirming the time-bound penalty consistent with those protocols which we are applying to Mr. Trump’s accounts,” it said.

But even when Trump comes back the company has announced that he will have to live by special rules made for him., which is significant because it means the ban is not permanent.

“When the suspension is eventually lifted, there will be a strict set of rapidly escalating sanctions that will be triggered if Mr. Trump commits further violations in future, up to and including permanent removal of his pages and accounts,” it said.

“In establishing the two-year sanction for severe violations, we considered the need for it to be long enough to allow a safe period of time after the acts of incitement, to be significant enough to be a deterrent to Mr. Trump and others from committing such severe violations in future, and to be proportionate to the gravity of the violation itself,” it said.

It is of note that the suspension will continue through the 2022 midterm elections where Trump is expected to play a key role for Republicans.

The originally reported plan was for the former president to launch his own social media platform to coincide with the Fourth of July celebrations, The Daily Mail reported.

Watch: Dutch Police Use Attack Dogs Against Anti-Lockdown Protesters

Amid the Omicron Covid variant spread, and despite an emerging consensus that this latest variant is not very severe in terms of individual impact and hospitalizations, lockdowns are returning to much of Europe, but so are fierce protests.

Remember, all of this is for your “safety”

Chaotic and disturbing scenes are coming out of Sunday’s large anti-restriction protests near the National Museum in Amsterdam. The protest had been declared illegal by authorities, but a huge crowd showed up anyway, and that’s when police in riot gear attempted to disperse thousands.

Among many scenes of people being beaten with police batons, dogs were also unleashed on the demonstrators, including in the above video which shows a man being mauled by a police dog who wouldn’t let go of his arm – even as he was prone on the ground at one point. It’s unclear if the officers were wanting the dog to release after clearly injuring the man, or if they wanted the animal to continue biting him.

Just before the police unleashed violent tactics on the crowd, the anti-lockdown protesters surrounded the anti-riot force and their vans, presumably there to make mass arrests.

“The Netherlands went into a sudden lockdown on December 19, with the government ordering the closure of all but essential stores, as well as restaurants, hairdressers, gyms, museums and other public places until at least January 14,” CNN writes of the new controversial lockdown. “Public gatherings of more than two people are prohibited under the current set of restrictions.”

The protest looked to be at least in the tens of thousands, and possibly bigger:

Clearly citizens in the Netherlands and elsewhere in Europe are furious over this climate of the ‘never-ending pandemic’ and corresponding lockdowns which governments seem to now impose with ease.

Angry crowds go after riot control police in The Netherlands this weekend:

Continue Reading HERE

The Hounding of Julian Assange Leaves Honest Journalism With No Refuge

By Jonathan Cook

It is no accident that Julian Assange, the digital transparency activist and journalist who founded WikiLeaks to help whistleblowers tell us what Western governments are really up to in the shadows, has spent 10 years being progressively disappeared into those very same shadows.

His treatment is a crime similar to those WikiLeaks exposed when it published just over a decade ago hundreds of thousands of leaked materials – documents we were never supposed to see – detailing war crimes committed by the United States and Britain in Iraq and Afghanistan.

These two Western countries killed non-combatants and carried our torture not, as they claimed, in the pursuit of self-defense or in the promotion of democracy, but to impose control over a strategic, resource-rich region.

It is the ultimate, ugly paradox that Assange’s legal and physical fate rests in the hands of two states that have the most to lose by allowing him to regain his freedom and publish more of the truths they want to keep concealed. By redefining his journalism as “espionage”– the basis for the US extradition claim – they are determined to keep the genie stuffed in the bottle.

Eyes off the ball

Last week, in overturning a lower court decision that should have allowed Assange to walk free, the English High Court consented to effectively keep Assange locked up indefinitely. He is a remand prisoner – found guilty of no crime – and yet he will continue rotting in solitary confinement for the foreseeable future, barely seeing daylight or other human beings, in Belmarsh high-security prison alongside Britain’s most dangerous criminals.

The High Court decision forces our eyes off the ball once again. Assange and his supposed “crime” of seeking transparency and accountability has become the story rather than the crimes he exposed that were carried out by the US to lay waste to whole regions and devastate the lives of millions.

The goal is to stop the public conducting the debate Assange wanted to initiate through his journalism: about Western state crimes. Instead the public is being deflected into a debate his persecutors want: whether Assange can ever safely be allowed out of his cell.

Assange’s lawyers are being diverted from the real issues, too. They will now be tied up for years fighting endless rearguard actions, caught up in the search for legal technicalities, battling to win a hearing in any court they can, to prevent his extradition to the United States to stand trial.

The process itself has taken over. And while the legal minutiae are endlessly raked over, the substance of the case – that it is US and British officials who ought to be held responsible for committing war crimes – will be glossed over.

Permanently silenced

But it is worse than the legal injustice of Assange’s case. There may be no hacksaws needed this time, but this is as visceral a crime against journalism as the dismemberment of the Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi officials back in 2018.

And the outcome for Assange is only slightly less preordained than it was for Khashoggi when he entered the Saudi embassy in Istanbul. The goal for US officials has always been about permanently disappearing Assange. They are indifferent about how that is achieved.

If the legal avenue is a success, he will eventually head to the US where he can be locked away for up to 175 years in severe solitary confinement in a supermax jail – that is, till long past his death from natural causes. But there is every chance he will not survive that long. Last January, a British judge rejected extraditing Julian Assange to the US over his “suicide risk“, and medical experts have warned that it will be only a matter of time before he succeeds.

That was why the district court blocked extradition – on humanitarian grounds. Those grounds were overturned by the High Court last week only because the US offered “assurances” that measures would be in place to ensure Assange did not commit suicide. But Assange’s lawyers pointed out: those assurances “were not enough to address concerns about his fragile mental health and high risk of suicide”. These concerns should have been apparent to the High Court justices.

There is no need to speculate about the Americans’ bad faith. It is only too apparent in the myriad get-out clauses in the “assurances” they provided. Those assurances can be dropped, for example, if US officials decide Assange is not being cooperative. The promises can and will be disregarded the moment they become an encumbrance on Washington’s ability to keep Assange permanently silenced.

‘Trapped in a cage’

But if losing the extradition battle is high stakes, so is the legal process itself. That could finish Assange off long before a decision is reached, as his fiancee Stella Moris indicated at the weekend. She confirmed that Assange suffered a small stroke during a hearing in October in the endless extradition proceedings. There are indications he suffered neurological damage, and is now on anti-stroke medication to try to stop a recurrence.

Assange and his friends believe the stroke was brought on by the constant double strain of his solitary confinement in Belmarsh and a legal process being conducted over his head, in which he is barely allowed to participate.

Nils Melzer, the United Nations expert on torture, has repeatedly warned that Assange has been subjected to prolonged psychological torture in the nine years since he fled into Ecuador’s embassy in London seeking asylum from US efforts to persecute him.

That form of torture, Melzer has pointed out, was refined by the Nazis because it was found to be far more effective at breaking people than physical torture. Moris told the Daily Mail:

“[The stroke] compounds our fears about [Assange’s] ability to survive the longer this long legal battle goes on. … Look at animals trapped in cages in a zoo. It cuts their life short. That’s what’s happening to Julian.”

And that indeed looks to be the prize for US officials that wanted him assassinated anyway. Whatever happens to Assange, the lawless US security state wins: it either gets him behind bars forever, or it kills him quietly and quite lawfully, while everyone is distracted, arguing about who Assange is rather what he exposed.

Political prisoner

In fact, with each twist and turn of the proceedings against Assange we move further from the realities at the heart of the case towards narrative distractions.

Who remembers now the first extradition hearings, nearly two years ago, at which the court was reminded that the very treaty signed by Britain and the US that is the basis for Assange’s extradition explicitly excludes political cases of the kind being pursued by the US against Assange?

It is a victory for state criminality that the discussion has devolved to Assange’s mental health rather than a substantive discussion of the treaty’s misapplication to serve political ends.

And similarly the focus on US assurances regarding Assange’s well-being is intended to obscure the fact that a journalist’s work is being criminalized as “espionage” for the first time under a hurriedly drafted, draconian and discredited piece of First World War legislation, the 1917 Espionage Act. Because Assange is a political prisoner suffering political persecution, legal arguments are apparently powerless to save him. It is only a political campaign that can keep underscoring the sham nature of the charges he faces.

The lies of power

What Assange bequeathed us through WikiLeaks was a harsh light capable of cutting through the lies of power and power of lies. He showed that western governments claiming the moral high ground were actually committing crimes in our name out of sight in far-off lands. He tore the mask off their hypocrisy.

He showed that the many millions who took to the streets in cities around the world in 2003 because they knew the US and UK would commit war crimes in Iraq were right to march. But he also confirmed something worse: that their opposition to the war was treated with utter contempt.

The US and UK did not operate more carefully, they were not more respectful of human rights, they did not tread more lightly in Iraq because of those marches, because of the criticism beforehand. The western war machine carried on regardless, crushing the lives of anyone who got caught up in its maw.

Now with Assange locked up and silenced, western foreign policy can return comfortably to the era of zero accountability that existed before Assange shook up the whole system with his revelations. No journalist will dare to repeat what Assange did – not unless they are ready to spend the rest of their days behind bars.

The message his abuse sends to others could not be clearer or more chilling: what happened to Assange could happen to you too.

The truth is journalism is already reeling from the combined assaults against Khashoggi and Assange. But the hounding of Assange strikes the bigger blow. It leaves honest journalism with no refuge, no sanctuary anywhere in the world.

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilizations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net. This originally appeared in the Middle East Eye.

Source: Antiwar.com

CBS Edits Out Their Own Reporter Blasting Pandemic Response for Hurting Kids

Cassandra Fairbanks,
December 28th, 2021

Crawford’s comments on Sunday’s Face the Nation went viral on social media, but CBS removed them from the actual show when it aired.

When asked what stories she thought the media did not cover properly in 2021, Crawford did not hold back.

“It’s the crushing impact that our COVID policies have had on young kids and children. By far the least serious risk for serious illness,” she said, adding “a healthy teenager has a one in a million chance of getting, and dying from COVID, which is way lower than, you know, dying in a car wreck on a road trip.”

“But they have suffered and sacrificed the most, especially kids and underrepresented at-risk communities. And now we have the Surgeon General saying there’s a mental health crisis among our kids,” Crawford continued. “The risk of suicide girl suicide attempts among girls now up 51 percent this year, black kids nearly twice as likely as white kids to die by suicide. I mean, school closures, lockdowns, cancellation of sports.”

Newsbusters, who first noticed the censorship, reported “CBS axed Crawford’s comments seconds before they would have aired. As you can see in the transcript and video of how the show aired (links above), White House correspondent Weijia Jiang said “we’ll see” about what happens with Congress in 2022 and Crawford was then set to follow, but Brennan instead went to a commercial break.”

WATCH: Journalist Reporting on Ghislaine Maxwell Trial Burglarized, Research Stolen

Don Via Jr. 
December 24, 2021

Kristan T. Harris is a Wisconsin-based independent journalist and host of the talk news radio show The Rundown Live. A media organization who over the years, in addition to hosting several notable guests, has also made a name for itself reporting high-profile events such as the protest and riot at the Capitol on January 6th, and unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin which led to the Kyle Rittenhouse shooting.

Pertaining to the latter, Mr. Harris was actually called to the witness stand during the recent Rittenhouse trial, as it was he who captured most of the crucial footage in the case.

Worthy of note, Mr. Harris is also loosely affiliated to The Free Thought Project, as I am myself a co-host to The Rundown Live.

Not shy to pursue speaking truth to power, shortly after a verdict was reached in the Rittenhouse case Harris decided to make the journey to New York to provide on-the-ground coverage of the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The partner of the late disgraced financier and convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was accused of sex trafficking.

Despite the notable lack of proportionate mainstream media attention, Harris has been present at the courthouse every day of the trial, providing regular updates.

In a few short weeks, The Rundown Live has already distinguished itself for its coverage of the trial, being the only media outlet to publish the full unredacted transcripts of the prosecution’s witness testimony. Including Jane Doe #1; Epstein’s former butler; Jane Doe #2 AKA Katie; Jane Doe #3 AKA Carolyn; in addition to Annie Farmer; and FBI Special Agent Kelly McGuire.

The outlet published other bombshell revelations, and conducted numerous interviews with both mainstream and independent media — including the likes of Dan Dicks of Press For Truth, and Jason Bermas.

However recently Kristan Harris has garnered some less-than-desirable attention as well. On the evening of Wednesday, December 22nd, the AirBnB in which he was staying in Jersey City to report on the trial was burglarized.

Security footage of the break-in appears to show a man of average height and build in casual dark clothing and a face mask remove the air conditioning unit and making his way inside the residence. Just two minutes later he reemerges holding a green bag containing a laptop.

The contents of the laptop contained the last several weeks worth of research pertaining to the trial. While much of the material was backed up on a cloud, it is still an immense loss.

In a Facebook post about the burglary, Harris clarified to those inquiring as to exactly how the thief made his way inside, and exactly what was taken. Specifying that despite the numerous valuable items about the residence, the intruder seemed to know exactly what he was looking for —

“The weird thing is that it’s the only thing missing in 90 seconds. My door was locked. There’s better goodies here.”

………

“He took the air conditioner out the front air bnb window crawled through went through kitchen and ajared my door from the kitchen. Ripped open closet door and stole my laptop. There were other high priced items including a 350 pair of headphones on the bed and other stuff…”

What causes this to be of even greater concern is that this incident took place less than 24 hours after Ghislaine Maxwell’s sister Isabelle had taken a slew of photos of media personnel outside of the courthouse, including of Mr. Harris. Leading some to believe this may have been a targeted act.

This is certainly a bizarre coincidence, if not something more.

A statement on The Rundown Live Facebook page updating followers of the incident affirmed —

“We will not be discouraged nor intimidated from telling the truth”

When The Free Thought Project spoke with Kristan Harris, it became apparent that this incident only served to strengthen his resolve, while he also stressed the importance of independent media, stating —

“We are the only platform publishing transcripts straight from the stenographer detailing the victims testimony. It’s imperative that independent journalists continue to dismantle propaganda by becoming sought after sources by the public. If The Rundown Live was not crowdsourced to attend the Ghislaine Maxwell trial would we know as much about the trial as we do?”

For those wishing to support Mr Harris’s efforts to shed light on this case, a friend and listener of The Rundown Live took it upon herself to start a GoFundMe campaign on their behalf.

As for the trial itself, the jury has spent the last two days in deliberation following closing statements made by the prosecution and defense. It is expected they will resume Monday following a brief recess for the holidays.