Capitol Hill hearing on ‘censorship industrial complex' under Biden based on ‘fiction', says expert
A Capitol Hill hearing held to explore supposed government censorship under Joe Biden was based on a 'fiction', a leading expert on countering online disinformation told members of Congress on Tuesday.
Nina Jankowicz, head of the American Sunlight Project, a pro-democracy organization, went on the offensive at a House of Representatives foreign relations subcommittee meeting held to examine the existence of an alleged 'censorship industrial complex', which Republicans claim was established to stifle rightwing views on social media, rather than combat foreign propaganda, as officially stated.
Having been labeled a 'spearhead' and 'tsarina' of such efforts by the committee's Republican chair, Bill Huizenga, Jankowicz – who briefly led the Department of Homeland Security's disinformation unit under the Biden administration – said the hearing was being held at a time when Donald Trump was attempting aggressive free speech restrictions.
'The premise of this hearing, the so called censorship industrial complex, is a fiction that has not only had profound impacts on my life and safety, but on our national security,' she said in her opening statement at a fractious hearing that exposed the width of the chasm between Republicans and Democrats on the issue.
'More alarmingly, this fiction is itself suppressing speech and stymieing critical research that protects our country.
'I want to acknowledge the irony that we're having this discussion as we witness an assault on the first amendment we have not seen in decades. The Trump administration has directed far more egregious violations of our constitution than the imagined actions of the Biden administration on which this hearing is premised.'
She singled out the detention and attempted deportation of Rumeysa Ozturk, a doctoral student at Tufts University, who wrote an opinion article critical of Israel's bombardment of Gaza, which she compared to the actions of authoritarian regimes in Russia, Belarus and Hungary.
Republicans have used their control of the House and Senate to stage a series of hearings in different congressional committees on the alleged existence of a censorship complex – whose name derives from the military industrial complex described by president Dwight Eisenhower in his farewell speech before leaving the White House in 1961. Opponents dismiss the notion as a conspiracy theory.
The committee hearings have coincided with the Trump administration's dismantling of safeguards designed to stop the spread of influence and disinformation in cyberspace by Russia in particular, but also widely attributed to China and Iran.
Even before Trump returned to office, the Republican-controlled Congress declined last December to renew the mandate of the state department's global engagement center (GEC), the leading government agency fighting Russian and Chinese propaganda.
Huizenga, a representative from Michigan, called on two other witnesses, Matt Taibbi and Benjamin Weingarten, to support the Republican contention that the body had been subverted to instead suppress rightwing opinion in America.
As evidence, Taibbi, a former Rolling Stone journalist who was among the recipients of the so-called 'Twitter files' released by Elon Musk, the platform's owner, to show evidence of alleged censorship, cited the case of Alex Berenson, a former New York Times journalist.
Berenson had been expelled from platform following White House pressure after posting that the Covid-19 vaccine did not prevent infection or the virus's transmission, Taibbi claimed.
Weingarten, a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, a rightwing thinktank, condemned the GEC as a 'truth squad … designed to suppress any information that countered national policy and to identify people who may have had opinions that were controversial or unwanted as foreign inspire'.
Democrats lined up to denounce the hearing as 'hypocrisy' and 'waste of taxpayers money' in light of the Trump administration's attempts to deport foreign students who had expressed pro-Palestinian views, moves that Jankowicz said violated the US constitution first amendment, which protects free speech.
Sydney Kamlager-Dove, the subcommittee's ranking Democrat, said the hearing was 'out of touch with the concerns of everyday Americans.
'I've been to the state department, and I do have concerns about censorship – – censorship of the employees who are terrified to say the wrong thing, to say anything, or have the wrong word in their job title and be terminated by an administration that publicly relishes punishing people for their speech,' she said. 'If we want to talk about censorship, we should begin with Trump's unprecedented assault on the first amendment and rule of law.'
Keith Self, a Republican representative from Texas, provoked anger among Democrats by appearing to liken the Biden administration's anti-disinformation efforts to steps by the Nazi to construct public opinion in 1930s Germany.
'A direct quote from Joseph Goebbels [the Nazi propaganda minister]: 'It is the absolute right of the state to supervise the formation of public opinion,' and I think that may be what we're discussing here,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
23 minutes ago
- The Sun
Explosions heard in Qatar as Iranian missiles shot towards US airbase after Tehran vowed revenge for Trump nuke strikes
IRAN launched a salvo of ballistic missiles at Qatar targeting the biggest US military base in the Middle East. Loud explosions were heard in central Doha as air defence systems worked to intercept the missiles launched at Al Udeid air base - home to some 10,000 US army personnel. 3 3 All the Iranian missiles were shot down, it is understood. Footage shared by OSINT accounts appeared to show interceptions by air defence systems. It comes after the US said it expects that Iran could carry out retaliatory attacks targeting American forces in the next 24 to 48 hours. The Qataris have now closed their airspace. They said they reserve the right to respond directly and in accordance with international law. It has also been said that there are no casualties at the US Al Udeid military base in Doha, following Iran's attack on the facility. Tehran repeatedly threatened to strike US military bases in the Middle East following Donald Trump's bombing of its nuclear sites. Qatar is home to the largest US military base in the Middle East – Al Udeid Air Base. The base in the desert outside of Doha serves as the forward HQ for US Central Command. It houses about 10,000 troops and hosts some 40 military aircraft. In total, the US has about 50,000 troops stationed in the Middle East. British military personnel also serve there on rotation. Earlier today, The Sun reported that US and UK embassies in Qatar warned American and British citizens to 'shelter in place until further notice'. Meanwhile, the Israelis carried out their most intense bombing raids in Iran - pounding the Islamic Republic's intelligence HQ, a prison full of dissidents and the Fordow nuke plant for the second time. The IDF blew the gates off the notorious Evin Prison - a pit of torture and executions - hoping to bust out the regime's fierce critics languishing behind the walls. Also targeted were the Basij Headquarters of the Revolutionary Guard, Iran's "Destruction of Israel" countdown clock and various other security hubs, the IDF said. The Fordow mountain-fortress nuclear site was bombed - barely a day after the Americans pulverised it - with IDF rockets going after the "access routes". Significant damage has likely been caused to the plant and the sensitive machinery it houses by the US's bombing, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said. Stay up to date with the latest on Israel vs Iran with The Sun's live blog below...
The Guardian
26 minutes ago
- The Guardian
header
Fifa is facing new questions over the increasingly fraught World Cup next year, with the issue of how to treat Iran while the country is involved in a conflict with the co-host the US. There are no provisions within Fifa's regulations to prevent Iran from playing their group matches in the US, despite the country being subject to military action by the Trump administration and Iranian citizens being under a travel ban that prevents them from entering the country. The ban contains an exemption that could apply to players, staff or associated families with teams at the 2026 Fifa World Cup. Iran, who faced USA in the group stage of the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, qualified in March for their fourth consecutive World Cup. Although 2026 is also being hosted by Canada and Mexico, only by being given a specific slot in group A could Iran avoid playing in the US, with their matches then taking place in Mexico. If Iran won that group they would stay in Mexico for their last-32 game and any last-16 match. Should they go further – and they have never reached a World Cup knockout game – they would then play in the US. Fifa did not respond on Monday to a request for comment from the Guardian and will likely be considering its options before the World Cup draw, which is due to take place in December. The decision will be a difficult one for its president, Gianni Infantino, who has associated himself closely with President Donald Trump, who authorised the use of US bombs on Iranian nuclear sites last weekend. Infantino and the Fifa Council will have the final say on inclusion in the competition and the makeup of the draw, but the organising committee for Fifa competitions will be expected to have input. The committee has members from Canada, Mexico and Iran, and its chair is Uefa's president, Aleksander Ceferin. In 2022, his organisation announced that Ukraine and Belarus would be kept apart in Uefa competition draws, after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and his action may provide an example for Fifa to follow. Before the World Cup draw in Qatar, the agreed draw constraints included limitations on where teams could be selected but this related only to a 'general principle' that no more than one team from each confederation (excluding Europe) should appear in a given group.
Reuters
28 minutes ago
- Reuters
Senate parliamentarian faults Republicans' plan to limit judges' power
June 23 (Reuters) - A U.S. Senate official has concluded that a Republican-drafted provision in President Donald Trump's massive tax and spending bill that would restrict the ability of judges to block government policies violates budgetary rules. The Senate's parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, advised over the weekend that the provision ran afoul of a Senate rule governing what can be included in budget reconciliation legislation that can be passed with a simple-majority vote and would instead need to be subject to a 60-vote threshold if it remained in the bill. Republicans, who control the Senate 53-47, intend to use complex budget rules to pass the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" with a simple majority vote. The parliamentarian is a nonpartisan referee. Her decision could spell doom for the provision's inclusion in the ultimate legislation Congress passes because it would allow Democrats to challenge the vote on the floor and require Republicans to muster 60 votes to pass it. Congressional leaders hope to enact the overall bill in the coming days so Trump can sign it into law before July 4. The courts-related provision in the Senate version of the bill would limit the ability of judges to issue preliminary injunctions blocking federal policies unless the party suing posts a bond to cover the government's costs if the ruling is later overturned. The bond requirement differs from one tucked into the version of the bill the Republican-controlled House of Representatives passed in May that would curb courts' power by curtailing the ability of judges to hold officials in contempt if they violate injunctions. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Sunday hailed the parliamentarian's assessment, saying Republicans had tried to "write Donald Trump's contempt for the courts into law — gutting judicial enforcement, defying the Constitution, and bulldozing the very rule of law that forms our democracy." The provision was drafted by Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is led by Senator Chuck Grassley. He had argued the provision would ensure judges enforce an existing requirement that parties seeking a preliminary injunction provide a security bond to cover costs incurred by a defendant if a judge's ruling is later overturned. Judges rarely require such bonds when a lawsuit is not pitting two private parties against each other but instead challenging an alleged unlawful or unconstitutional government action. Several judges have denied the Trump administration's requests for bonds or issued nominal ones. Grassley in a statement on Sunday said Republicans are committed to using all available avenues to "ensure courts operate according to lawful and constitutional standards." Congressional Republicans have called for banning or curtailing nationwide injunctions blocking government policies after key parts of Trump's agenda have been stymied by such court rulings. The House in April voted 219-213 largely along party lines in favor of the No Rogue Rulings Act to do so, but the Senate has not yet taken up the measure. A White House memo in March directed heads of government agencies to request that plaintiffs post bonds if they are seeking an injunction against an agency policy. Such bonds can make obtaining an injunction a cost-prohibitive option in cases concerning multi-billion-dollar agenda items. Read more: US Senate Republicans seek to limit judges' power via Trump's tax-cut bill
