Electing ANY Democrat-POTUS WILL Destroy America – Part VI: Google Cancels

At the suggestion of a friend, the word “WILL” has supplanted “Could” in the title, in light of the Dems’ almost universal support for efforts of Antifa/BLM to effect a violent revolution; the focus here is on how Google is (and has been) a force behind the Cancel Culture.

Breitbart has dubbed as “Masters of the Universe” the tech company monopolies that control so much of the public’s lives:  grouped as FANG (Facebook/Instagram, Amazon/Apple, Netflix and Google; scrutiny by the DoJ has been building.

Because of Google’s recent power-grab (facilitated by NBC), it is the focus of this essay but, first, it is again necessary to update the “statue” controversy (already explored here and here and the abdication of the role of  journalists (here); the latter essay mainstreams a buncha hyperlinks [90] that convey useful backgrounders on myriad issues.

Google’s Top 100 Pseudoconservative “Influencers” (*this elaborative article must be read in-toto*) was published by The National Pulse (which is edited by Raheem Kassam, a sidekick of Stephen K. Bannon whom I met almost three years ago at the annual ZOA Gala); this previously undisclosed “go to” list of “conservative” influencers (*which also merits review in its entirety*) is invoked to affect the political dynamics in Washington, D.C., rushing to defend Google whenever Google needs them to spin.

Cited here by Tucker Carlson and subsequently, sadly, is exposure of Senator Mike Lee’s evolution on Google by concluding, “maybe it’s every bit as corrupt as it seems”; Carlson has blasted this tech giant’s power over the media, concluding “If you’re in the news business, you obey Google.”

Throughout, Big Tech has been laboring to block the goal that Carlson has  characterized as the “Chief Threat” to the USA, having exhaustively explained why the DoJ has targeted Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act that shields them; this week, they have had to work overtime to neutralize the impact of what Google tried to pull off against competitors (with NBC ’s connivance).

Google threatened two right-leaning blogs with loss of ad revenue due to allegedly “racist” content in their comment sections, demonetizing Zero Hedge and prompting Federalist co-founder Sean Davis to acquiesce rather than risk being deplatformed; an NBC Reporter thanked a UK GOVT-LINKED GROUP for its “collaboration,” a censorship initiative that Senator Ted Cruz characterized as “Google Is the Empire from Star Wars Testing the Death Star” as he wondered aloud whether Google will apply the same standards to all media organizations, or just to those with which it has political disagreements.

Co-founder Ben Domenech observed that The Federalist had survived the attack because it is well-known, but that the “dangerous” episode should serve as a warning “about the unchecked power of big tech companies, particularly when they can be manipulated by partisans, including partisan journalists.”

Legacy Media tried to cancel ZeroHedge, The Federalist, and the One America News Network simply by issuing the now-classic accusation of “racism”; it emanated from an activist/journalist who supports BLM (without involvement of Peacock brass), illustrating how former juggernauts such as NBC (not dead yet) wield what power they still have recklessly.

Google’s “youtube” division has manifest what some consider “evil” motives by having taken down (a.k.a. “limited the number of  viewers for”) several dozen short videos by Dennis Prager’s “Prager-U” for not meeting “community standards”; note that such censorship (by upwards of 10,000 Google staff who “moderate” You Tube, a process Google CEO Sundar Pichai has defended) included one of Dennis Prager’s videos that rebutted the Charlottesville lie that The Donald had blasphemed.

Noting that Prager is Jewish, it is ominous that Google partnered with a Jew-hating, pro-Hamas Muslim group; in this well-referenced essay, Pamela Geller details the implications of this corporate behavior and what should be done about it, namely an antitrust of Google that mirrors the state Attorneys General who have initiated an antitrust probe of Big Tech.

Thus, it isn’t surprising that Jews complain Google searches are returning anti-Semitic results, for these Tech Giants (Amazon, Facebook, Twitter and Google) allow hate profiteers [the Southern Poverty Law Center] to police accounts; how else to explain Awlaki’s Al-Qaeda recruitment lectures being offered in Google Play Store App.

*

Google’s (Chinese-style) social credit system suggests America (indeed, the world) is “moving into a new, controlled society worse than old totalitarianism” (according to a philosopher on Google Leak).

In this regard, it’s a bit unnerving that a Chinese smartphone company (Xiaomi) is spying on users’ every move (both via ‘phone and web) using “backdoor” technology built into the company’s smartphones, which run Google’s Android OS; this reflects Chinese reliance on electronics, for example, to permit Huawei to route data to Beijing (per ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt). Schmidt has given $4.7 Million to boost left-wing National Public Radio and has been fingered by Sharyl Attkisson as having started a Fake News “Propaganda Campaign”).

This is why it has been alleged that Google’s thieving collaborations with Communist China and Apple don’t speak well for Google; feeding the dragon, Google deleted the App that helped users delete Chinese Apps.

Google works with China, but Google employees insisted that the company stop working with the U.S. Defense Department; it has been suggested that Google soured on leftist identity politics following an employee lawsuit  and Breitbart exposés.

Indeed, although a former Google engineer claimed Google isn’t partisan, President Trump is concerned about the digital monopoly enjoyed by Google and Facebook, for Google search manipulation can swing nearly 80% of undecided voters; one former engineer, now whistleblower, said Google can change millions of votes  in  a national election (noting that, in the 2018 Election, Google’s bias may have shifted 78.2 million votes to the Dems).

This explains why Trump said Google, Facebook and Amazon are colluding with Dems against him because Google and Silicon Valley are “terrified of intellectual diversity”; he feels their “Radical Left” bias is “illegal.”

This may be perceived by some as another of Trump’s “outrageous” claims (e.g., “Obama/Hillary wiretapped Trump Tower”) that subsequently become corroborated, for an insider blew the whistle (using a hidden cam c/o Project Veritas) when an Exec revealed Google’s plan to prevent recurrence in 2020 of the “Trump situation.”

In this regard, a Google insider turned over 950 pages of documents and a laptop to the DoJ to allege political-bias; these concerns could affect other seemingly legitimate activities, such as the allegation that Google is reportedly complicit in preferentially helping Hispanic GOTV [get-out-the-vote] entities.

Note the accumulation of specific Google’s anti-conservative allegations:  [1]—a Senior Google Search Engineer advocated for censorship of ‘Terrorist’ Marsha Blackburn; [2]—a Leaked Google Briefing Admitted abandonment of Free Speech for ‘Safety And Civility’; [3]—Google suspended an evangelical church’s app for violating coronavirus “Sensitive Events policy”; [4]—Google apologized for labeling a NC state senator as a ‘bigot’ in its search results; [5]—conservative websites [e.g., American Thinker] fear they are targets for losing out in searches; [6]—a judge ruled that Google must face a hiring discrimination lawsuit against   conservatives; [7]— Google fired another conservative employee who spoke out against the company’s bias; [8]—Google protected Jussie Smollett from “Disparaging” Searches;  [9]—two more Google blacklists emerged, designed to remove “fringe domains” and op-eds from special search results; and [10]—Google’s Artificial Intelligence research [Deep Mind] is Sharia-compliant.

The accumulation of generic Google’s anti-conservative allegations were triggered when Google replaced the “Fact Check” function on its Search Page with a new one that almost exclusively targets conservative sites; a new tool revealed how far the Leftie-Google censors conservative content in search results.

In the aftermath of the NBC foreign collusion debacle, lawmakers reportedly have rallied against Google and Big Tech; Rep. Devin Nunes had warned Google that testimony might be mandated if anti-GOP search results kept emerging.

Meanwhile, Sen. Josh Hawley continues his Culture War against Big Tech, having blasted Google for threatening Right-leaning Media by controlling information that people see; he has also advocated  urgently in favor of pursuing anti-trust legislation against both Google and Facebook.

As Tech Titans have tiptoed toward their respective monopolies, it has increasingly appeared that the DoJ will sue Google as soon as this summer; within this context, critics have advised that Google should “Google” what “Fair Use” means.

They argue that Google dominance is no longer a sure thing, and that the  SCOTUS can stop Google from stealing the ideas of others [Google v. Oracle] by stopping the legal doctrine of “transformative use,” an abuse of the “fair use” exceptions to copyright laws.

Hovering overhead are both the News Industry (that generates $4.7 Billion for Google and wants a piece of the action) and a flying car startup backed by Google’s founder that offers test flights (perhaps to be invoked to compete with Amazon, who knows?).

Prior to the 2008 election, Google’s CEO claimed the Internet had helped Obama; omitted from this mini-confessional is that he had played a strong personal role in this regard (assisting both Obama and Hillary), presaging the emergence of the Cancel Culture and the Weaponization of Big Tech.

About the Author
Robert B. Sklaroff MD is a physician-activist who is a radical, liberal, moderate, conservative, reactionary [depending upon the topic] who has developed many political stances that scrupulously attempt to identify the "nut" of "hot" issues; although predictions are notoriously deficient [as assiduously chronicled by my son], my insights are durable. I have also written about medical politics [particularly Vaping and ObamaDon'tCare] and have attempted to articulate the action-item [that I have often pursued absent support]. Aggressively followed is the discipline of capturing and then addressing all reputable perspectives; the reader is thereby maximally "armed" to critique the output.
Related Topics
Related Posts
Comments