Tag Archives: facebook

Revealed: New Doc Shows How an Obama-Tied Dark Money Group Used Zuckerberg’s Cash to Swing Election

The following article is sponsored by Citizens United.

What if the 2020 election was “rigged” in plain sight and through entirely legal means using $400 million dollars from Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan through the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI)? The bombshell upcoming documentary Rigged from Citizens United Productions explains how this Big Tech power couple contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to a pair of non-profit organizations through CZI.  The non-profits, in turn, spent the money on a Democrat-focused get-out-the-vote effort all under the guise of pandemic “election safety.”

Rigged starts by recounting Big Tech’s role in the last two elections, starting with 2016, when Donald Trump—harnessing the power of social media—shocked the world by flipping the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania to pull off an upset victory against Hillary Clinton. By the time of Trump’s inauguration, Mark Zuckerberg had come under tremendous fire from the Democrat elite over Facebook’s perceived failure to censor content seen as favorable to the Trump campaign. But four years later, lo and behold, the coronavirus pandemic would give Zuckerberg a clear shot at redemption.

The documentary Rigged tells this story. Through their philanthropic organization the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI), which lists Barack Obama’s former campaign manager David Plouffe (who authored the book A Citizen’s Guide to Beating Donald Trump) as a key strategist, Zuckerberg and his wife donated $69.5 million to the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR) and a whopping $328 million to the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), a non-profit headed by Obama Foundation fellow Tiana Epps-Johnson, who prior to creating CTCL in 2015, worked for an organization described by the Washington Post as “the Democratic party’s Hogwarts for digital wizardry.”

As former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gabelman says in the documentary, the CTCL essentially became a vehicle for Zuckerberg and Chan to fund get-out-the-vote efforts in mostly Democrat-populated districts in key swing states like Wisconsin.

In 2019, CTCL received a mere $2.8 million in contributions before the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative’s $328 million cash infusion in the lead-up to the 2020 election. Though these massive funds were labeled as “grants” for “safe administrations of public elections during the COVID-19 pandemic,” the documentary demonstrates that these donations were used to encourage and facilitate mail-in voting disproportionally in Democrat-run areas as well as to fund the proliferation of ballot drop boxes and a host of other things designed to boost Joe Biden’s vote totals in key swing states.

“They’re sending the money to big urban centers, they’re dramatically-increasing the ballot boxes that are there, and they’re conditioning the money on those polling locations, those government entities, throwing open the flood gates, to potential voter fraud,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) says in Rigged“This was the greatest billionaire assault on election integrity we’ve ever seen.”

“The Zuckerbucks folks were paying governments with grants with conditions that they go do get-out-the-vote activities in the Democrat areas. In the Republican areas, they just gave them the money, and they said, ‘Hey, we’re helping them conduct the election,’” Ken Cuccinelli, the national chairman for the Election Transparency Initiative, explains in Rigged.

Hosted by Citizens United president David Bossie and featuring interviews from prominent conservative leaders, including Ted Cruz, Newt Gingrich, and President Trump himself, the documentary Rigged offers a warning cry for what’s surely to come if Republicans do not find a way to stop left-wing billionaires like Mark Zuckerberg from using their spending power to influence elections for years to come.

“He should totally be held accountable, and he should never be allowed to do it again,” Trump tells Bossie in the documentary. “It was a rigged election. People have to find out what happened, and they have to hold people accountable.”

You can learn more about this groundbreaking documentary and watch Rigged in its entirety here.

Social Media Freedom Foundation Sues Government Under 5th Amendment – May Impact Tech Giant’s Section 230 Benefits

Guest post by Facebook whistleblower Ryan Hartwif

We live in perilous times for freedom of speech, and we’re beginning to see the unchecked power of technology companies as they flex their muscle throughout the Ukraine conflict. Oddly, Facebook has decided to allow praise of a neo-nazi group in Ukraine, a local militia called the Azov Battalion. As Sam Biddle from The Intercept writes, “What happens when a group you’ve deemed too dangerous to freely discuss is defending its country against a full-scale assault?”

This issue of militias being put on Facebook’s Dangerous Organizations list also affects us in the United States, since we know hundreds of state militias in the United States have also been put on this list. So not only is Facebook involved in foreign policy, they are heavily involved in regulating state-based militia organizations. I discuss Facebook’s policy on nationalism and militia groups in chapter 7 of my book, titled Behind The Mask of Facebook: A Whistleblower’s Shocking Story of Big Tech Bias and Censorship.

Despite pushback against Facebook and tech titans, citizens and even foreign governments are powerless against tech companies’ wave of propaganda and influence in elections.

I’ve done my best to bring to light some of Facebook’s corruption, but little did I imagine myself four years ago being so involved in lawsuits and criminal referrals against Big Tech. I started as a content moderator for Facebook in March of 2018, and went public in 2020 with Project Veritas, after filming with a hidden camera for 9 months and exposing Facebook’s bias against conservatives and influence in the 2020 election.

Since then, I have contributed to a criminal referral to the DOJ for Mark Zuckerberg, helped organize a lawsuit against Youtube, spearheaded by Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies, and I’m currently working with the Social Media Freedom Foundation and their constitutional challenge against section 230.

The Social Media Freedom Foundation, a 501c3 founded by Jason Fyk, has a unique legal approach to section 230. Since Fyk’s personal case against Facebook went to the Supreme Court, he has standing to sue the government, which he is doing under the 5th amendment, for depriving him of liberty and property. Fyk’s original case against Facebook, explained succinctly in this March 2022 interview with NTD News, is that Facebook sold his page to another entity because they were paying more in advertising than Fyk. Jason Fyk’s initial lawsuit against Facebook from 2018 can be found here. The new constitutional challenge against section 230 argues the following:

The Social Media Freedom Foundation (“SMFF”)  non-profit charity organization (in conjunction with Fyk), challenges the constitutionality of the CDA’s delegation of regulatory authority that permits the discretionary restrictive actions of a commercial private entity. This discretionary enforcement resulted in the advancement of anti-competitive animus against Fyk (and many other users like Fyk), an animus that cannot, by definition, meet the qualification of “Good Samaritan” to enjoy the entitlement of complete immunity for any and all liability for any malfeasance or tortious conduct. Regulation, penalization, or deprivation in any form, carried out by an authorized government agent (i.e., whether private or public) “to fill up the details” (i.e., fill in the quasi-legislative rules) at the directive of Congress, must afford due process and free speech of the entity or person being regulated. The SMFF and Fyk lodges this facial and as-applied constitutional challenge of Section 230, with the law being glaringly violative of the constitutional doctrines and/or statutory canons cited above.

Ryan Hartwig is an officer of the Social Media Freedom Foundation

House Republicans Open New Probe into Twitter, Facebook Suppressing Hunter Biden Laptop Story

Sophie Mann
March 31, 2022

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday announced a new investigation into Facebook and Twitter trying to suppress initial reporting in October 2020 about Hunter Biden’s laptop.

In recent days, mainstream media outlets including the New York Times and Washington Post have confirmed the legitimacy of the laptop and its contents, which were initially reported on by the New York Post in the days leading up to the 2020 presidential election. 

At the time, Facebook and Twitter suppressed the Post’s article detailing of how Hunter Biden appeared to use his father’s position and influence for his and his family’s financial gain. 

The committee said they will conduct a thorough investigation into social media giants Facebook and Twitter actions to “interfere in free and fair election-related public discourse” on their platforms that worked “to the benefit of President Biden and the detriment of former President Trump,” according to letters sent to both companies. 

FLASHBACK: Prominent MSNBC Producer Spread Misinformation to Cover for Hunter Biden

Hannah Nightingale
Mar 20, 2022 

As the Hunter Biden laptop story comes back into the national spotlight after The New York Times finally acknowledged the laptop’s legitimacy, a prominent MSNBC producer has been revealed to have previously stood by Facebook’s censoring of the story, saying it’s “a disputed report” containing “disinformation.”

In the lead-up to the election, on Oct. 14, 2020, shortly after the New York Post published their initial reporting on the laptop, Kyle Griffin, an executive producer at MSNBC, tweeted in support of Facebook’s censorship of the bombshell story.

“The Trump campaign claims Facebook is ‘censoring journalism’ because Facebook plans to limit the spread of the NY Post report. That is not censorship. Facebook is under no obligation to allow a disputed report that appears to contain disinformation to spread on their platform,” Griffin wrote in October 2020.

The New York Post‘s story resurfaced because of a recent New York Times article, in which the corporate media outlet wrote that they have now authenticated the contents of the laptop, which talk about Hunter Biden’s business dealings with Ukrainian energy company Burisma and world leaders.

The acknowledgment of the laptop by the major paper appeared to fall on deaf ears though with a number of former intelligence officials and media personalities, who still refuse to accept the recent revelation and decline to apologize over previous claims suggesting the story was “Russian disinformation.”

In a White House press conference last week, Biden press secretary Jen Psaki, who had dismissed the story as “Russian disinfo,” was grilled over her assessment.

In response to numerous questions, Psaki pointed reporters towards the Department of Justice and representatives of Biden’s son, saying “I’m a spokesperson for the United States; he doesn’t work for the United States.”

Lawmaker Calls for Full Investigation Into Collusion Between Big Tech, Mainstream Media and Democrats

Elizabeth Stauffer, The Western Journal
March 19th, 2022

“So, let’s get back to the name-calling,” said “journalist” Leslie Stahl in an interview with then-President Donald Trump after dismissing what should have been one of the most consequential October surprises in presidential election history, the Hunter Biden laptop story.

The New York Post’s October 2020 bombshell story, which exposed a presidential candidate’s planned business deal with a CCP-affiliated company established precisely to enrich his family, set up so that the candidate himself, referred to as “The Big Guy,” would receive a 10 percent share of future profits, should have derailed Joe Biden’s campaign. The emails revealed in this game-changing report provided a road-map of the Biden family’s long history of influence peddling.

But we quickly learned that a scandal is only a scandal if Big Tech, the legacy media and a group of former intelligence community leaders say it is.

The New York Post reported that, far from denying the laptop belonged to Hunter Biden, or that it had been hacked, the Biden campaign said there was nothing on his “official schedules” about a 2015 meeting with a Ukrainian energy executive.

The collaboration which ensued between Big Tech, the legacy media and establishment veterans of the intelligence community who were deeply invested in a Biden victory, to discredit and/or to suppress the story can only be described as collusion.

Twitter and Facebook took the lead in the campaign to label the report as Russian disinformation. Big Tech openly censored the article on their platforms “to limit the spread of potentially false information” even as Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey admitted to lawmakers he had no evidence to prove the story was disinformation.

Facebook was all in as well.

Providing further “proof” that the article was nothing but a “smear” from a media outlet that openly endorsed Trump’s re-election, over 50 intelligence community officials signed a letter which called into question the authenticity of the report. The first four signers included former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former CIA Directors Mike Hayden, Leon Panetta and John Brennan, all of whom deeply despised Trump.

Essentially, the letter said that the Russians were trying to influence a U.S. presidential election, just like they had in 2016. They wrote that the “emails purportedly belonging to Vice President Biden’s son Hunter, … [had] all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

The letter said they, of course, did not know if the emails were genuine or not, but that “our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.”

In the video below, Biden tells Trump in a final debate that the story was a “Russian plant” and points to the letter from “50 former national security folks” as validation.

On Thursday, seventeen months after the news broke, The New York Times quietly admitted that the laptop and the emails it contains are real. The admission came in the 24th paragraph of an article whose title, “Hunter Biden Paid Tax Bill, but Broad Federal Investigation Continues,” provides no clue of the Grand Canyon-sized truth they are finally acknowledging.

The paragraph reads:

People familiar with the investigation said prosecutors had examined emails between Mr. Biden, Mr. Archer and others about Burisma and other foreign business activity. Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.

Moreover, the highlighted text (theirs) links to an October 2020 article, updated in September 2021, in which the Times discredits the laptop story as “a bid to damage Mr. Biden’s presidential campaign.”

The New York Times, whose content informs the opinions of a large swath of Americans, covered up the truth about a corrupt presidential candidate to ensure his victory. And now, 17 months later, after the leader they helped elect has inflicted untold damage upon the country and on the world, they offer a subdued admission and no apology.

Republican Rep. Darrell Issa of California sees the collusion between Big Tech, the legacy media and the Democrat industrial complex to cast suspicion and even hide this story as the real election interference, as many of us do. And he’s called for Congress to initiate an investigation.

Obviously, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would rather stick needles in her eyes than open an investigation, but chances that Republicans will take control of Congress in January are excellent and this may well be their first order of business.

Below, conservatives react to this news:

The New York Times tried to nonchalantly sneak a colossal, consequential admission into the 24th paragraph of a semi-related article for a reason. This was a deliberate editorial decision.

It will obviously enable them to cite this article to say ‘See, we reported that the emails were real.’

But there may be a greater purpose. I question the timing. Why now? Although this is pure speculation on my part, I have to wonder if they’re trying to get ahead of new developments in the DOJ’s case against Hunter Biden.

Is the other shoe about to drop?

Possibly.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Russia Opens Criminal Case and Calls to Classify Facebook Meta as ‘Extremist Organization’ – All Services Including Instagram and Whatsapp Will be Banned in Russia

Jim Hoft
March 12th, 2022

The Russian government moved to categorize the social media giant Meta Platform as an ‘extremist organization’ after an internal email showed that it would temporarily allow its users to call for violence and murder against Russian nationals.

Earlier this month, Russia blocked access to Facebook after imposing partial restrictions on the social media giant for refusing Russia’s request to stop fact-checking their state-run media.

On Thursday, Reuters reported that Meta would allow users in some countries to call for violence against Russians and Russian soldiers in the context of the Ukraine invasion.

Now, Russia opened a criminal case against Meta for permitting violence, including death threats in their platform against Russian nationals. Russia’s prosecutor general office also called to label them as an ‘extremist organization.’

CNBC reported:

Russia opened a criminal case against Facebook’s parent Meta Platforms on Friday after the social network changed its hate speech rules to allow users to call for “death to the Russian invaders” in the context of the war with Ukraine.

Russian prosecutors asked a court to designate the U.S. tech giant as an “extremist organization,” and the communications regulator said it was restricting access to Meta’s Instagram.

“A criminal case has been initiated … in connection with illegal calls for murder and violence against citizens of the Russian Federation by employees of the American company Meta, which owns the social networks Facebook and Instagram,” Russia’s Investigative Committee said.

The committee reports directly to President Vladimir Putin. It was not immediately clear what the consequences of the criminal case might be.

No comment was immediately available from Meta in response to a Reuters request.

Orwell’s “Two Minutes Hate” Becomes Reality as Facebook Now Allows Violence & Hate Directed at Russians

By Matt Agorist
March 11th, 2022

Over the last 6 years, Facebook, now Meta, has clamped down on any and all calls for violence by users on its platform. Users who advocated for violence were banned and some of them were reported to authorities in the company’s attempt to make its platform a more peaceful place. But all that has changed now as the world slips into a scene from George Orwell’s dystopian novel, 1984.

On Thursday night, Reuters reported that Meta Platforms will now allow Facebook and Instagram users in some countries to call for violence against Russians in what they refer to as a “temporary change to its hate speech policy.”

Users can now openly advocate for the assassination of world leaders, so long as they are considered political enemies of the West. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko are fair game in Meta’s new world.

“As a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine we have temporarily made allowances for forms of political expression that would normally violate our rules like violent speech such as ‘death to the Russian invaders.’ We still won’t allow credible calls for violence against Russian civilians,” Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said in a statement.

If the user gets too detailed about how and where they are going to kill these Russians, only then will Facebook and Instagram draw the line.

Citing the Reuters story, Russia’s US embassy demanded that Washington stop the “extremist activities” of Meta allowing its users to call for violence.

“Users of Facebook & Instagram did not give the owners of these platforms the right to determine the criteria of truth and pit nations against each other,” the embassy said on Twitter Thursday night in response to the change.

☝️We demand that 🇺🇸 authorities stop the extremist activities of @Meta, take measures to bring the perpetrators to justice. Users of #Facebook & #Instagram did not give the owners of these platforms the right to determine the criteria of truth and pit nations against each other. https://t.co/1RkrjRmEtA pic.twitter.com/sTacSm4nDt

— Russian Embassy in USA 🇷🇺 (@RusEmbUSA) March 11, 2022

To be clear, these calls for violence are not only allowed against the Russian military and its leaders, but Facebook now considers it fine and dandy for its users to call for violence against the Russian people as well — so long as it is “in the context of the Ukrainian invasion.”

“We are issuing a spirit-of-the-policy allowance to allow T1 violent speech that would otherwise be removed under the Hate Speech policy when: (a) targeting Russian soldiers, EXCEPT prisoners of war, or (b) targeting Russians where it’s clear that the context is the Russian invasion of Ukraine (e.g., content mentions the invasion, self-defense, etc.),” it said in the email.

Anyone who has read Orwell’s 1984 should see a familiar theme with this move by Facebook — it’s called Two Minutes Hate. Two Minutes Hate was a daily public ritual in the novel during which members of the Outer Party of Oceania must watch a film depicting the enemies of the state and openly and loudly express hatred for them.

The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but, on the contrary, that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretence was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge-hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one’s will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one object to another like the flame of a blowlamp.

No other political speech is allowed except for hatred of those who oppose the party. As Orwell explained, in re-directing the members’ subconscious feelings away from the Party’s government of Oceania, and towards non-existent external enemies, the Party minimizes thoughtcrime and the consequent, subversive behaviors of thought criminals.

If the masses direct their hatred and fear toward a single enemy, Vladimir Putin and Russians, then they will be unconcerned with the atrocities carried out by their own governments.

Instead of Putin, Emmanuel Goldstein — the principal enemy of the people of Oceania — is the target of the hatred and calls for violence for the two-minute period. He is seen and heard on the “telescreen” during the Ministry of Truth’s propaganda display.

Just as anyone who questioned the party in 1984 was associated with Goldstein, we are seeing the same scenario play out with Russia. If you do not parrot the establishment’s talking points on Ukraine, you are a puppet of Putin and worthy of hate and disdain.

The foresight by Orwell is uncanny and should be an indicator that Western society is slipping into dark times.

Yes, Vladimir Putin is a tyrant, thug, criminal, who is committing mass murder and deserves your scorn and ire. This war is horrific and he bears the brunt of the responsibility.

However, when hatred and violence are condoned and sanctioned by the largest social media network in the world — with a sordid track record of manipulating its users — you should begin to question your reality.

The Russian people are not our enemy. Just as Americans have no say in their government invading Iraq and Afghanistan, and drone bombing children in the Middle East, the Russians have no say in their dictator waging a war in Ukraine.

We cannot be so blinded by fear that we are willing to relinquish control of our emotions to known liars and manipulators, simply because they encourage it by allowing it. As Orwell warns us, this fear will consume you. We have to do better.

If humanity is no better than easily steered blind hatred for our fellow humans, then what’s left that’s worth fighting for?

Source: The Free Thought Project

Meta-Facebook Manager of Community Development Staffer Caught In Hotel Child Sex Sting Operation

A Manager of Community Development at Meta/Facebook was busted in a Chris Hansen-style pedophile sting operation by independent journalists.

Andy Ngo reported,

Exclusive: High-level Facebook staffer allegedly caught in amateur child sex sting operation

A live stream video posted on YouTube on Feb. 16 by “Predator Catchers Indianapolis” purports to show Meta/Facebook Manager of Community Development Jeren Andrew Miles, of Palm Springs, Calif., being caught in a child sex sting in Columbus, Ohio.

Miles, 35, allegedly communicated sexually explicit texts with a person who said they were a 13-year-old boy. He allegedly made plans for the boy to meet him at Le Meridien Columbus hotel, which is how and where the “Predator Catchers” group interviewed him.

Miles serves on the board of directors for LGBTQ+ group, Equality California. He has since completely deleted his social media accounts on LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram and Facebook. Miles previously worked as the Director of Community Affairs for Lyft, according to an archive on LinkedIn.

Eric Schmutte, the man recording the live stream and one-half of “Predator Catchers Indianapolis,” tells me

he is sending all the chat logs and evidence to law enforcement in Columbus, Ohio and Palm Springs, Calif., where Miles purportedly lives.

Jeren Miles’ Facebook and Twitter pages have been deleted, but his Facebook was archived.

Lawsuit Claims Michigan Election Chief Illegally Accepted Zuckerberg Money to Swing 2020 Election

A lawsuit filed against Democrat Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson asserts she illegally accepted private money for the 2020 presidential election to swing the election for President Joe Biden.

The Chicago-based Thomas More Society filed the lawsuit in the Michigan Court of Claims, alleging Benson violated election law by spending private election funding on partisan purposes that denied Michigan voters’ constitutional equal access voting rights.

The Center Square previously reported Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan contributed $400 million nationwide into the 2020 election through their Chicago-based nonprofit, the Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL).

The 166-page filing claims that nearly half of CTCL’s funds flowed to Democrat-dominated areas where Biden won. For example, the lawsuit says CTCL made 19 payments exceeding $100,000 all to jurisdictions that Biden carried in 2020.

The lawsuit cites an America Public Media report finding some cities spent little of the money on personal protective equipment (PPE).

The Michigan Legislature aimed to ban private funding of public elections via Senate Bill 303, which Gov. Gretchen Whitmer vetoed in 2021.

Thomas More Society Special Counsel Thor Hearne said that Benson spent CTCL money to boost Democrat-dominated areas in the 2020 election via increased mail-in voting and ballot harvesting.

“The Michigan Constitution guarantees every eligible citizen the right of equal protection when it comes to voting, and that means state officials may not put in place an election scheme that enhances the weight of votes cast by one class of voters or increases one favored class of voters’ access to the ballot,” Hearne said in a statement. “That’s just what happened here. Analysis of data that the Center for Tech and Civic Life provided to the Internal Revenue Service and other public records demonstrates that this scheme was designed to favor urban areas in Michigan and to disadvantage Michigan voters in rural and suburban more politically conservative areas.”

Hearne said the lawsuit aims to set the rules for future elections, not past elections.

“This case is not about relitigating the 2020 election,” Hearne said. “It is about making sure that these unfair and illegal activities cannot happen in any future election in Michigan. As Michigan’s chief election official, Secretary Benson is responsible for ensuring that every eligible Michigan voter has an equal right and opportunity to cast a ballot.”

A CNN report says 11 Republican-led states have prohibited private money from funding public elections.

Thomas More Society attorneys are representing Wisconsin voters in a similar lawsuit.

“The only way Michigan residents can stop a high-tech billionaire from California from directing the conduct of Michigan’s 2022 election is for the Michigan voters and citizens to prevail in this case against Secretary of State Benson,” Thomas More Society President and Chief Counsel Tom Brejcha said in a statement.

Peter Thiel to Retire from Board of Facebook Owner Meta

Madeleine Hubbard
February 7th, 2022

Facebook parent Meta announced Monday that PayPal co-founder and billionaire investor Peter Thiel will no longer serve on its board of directors. 

Thiel has served on the board since 2005 but decided to not run for re-election to the board during its 2022 annual stockholders meeting, according to a Meta press release.

“It has been a privilege to work with one of the great entrepreneurs of our time,” Thiel said. “Mark Zuckerberg’s intelligence, energy, and conscientiousness are tremendous. His talents will serve Meta well as he leads the company into a new era.” 

Thiel invested $500,000 in thefacebook.com in 2004, CNBC reports. The company has since evolved into Meta and hit above the $1 trillion market cap

“Peter has been a valuable member of our board and I’m deeply grateful for everything he has done for our company — from believing in us when few others would, to teaching me so many lessons about business, economics, and the world,” Zuckerberg, Meta founder and CEO, said.

Earlier this month, Thiel made news after hosting a fundraiser for Trump-backed Harriet Hageman, who is challenging Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.).