DeSantis: Apple's Threat to Deplatform Twitter from Its App Store is an Act of "Raw Monopolistic Power" Which Should Be Met by Congressional Action

Florida's Voice @FLVoiceNews

WATCH: Ron DeSantis says Apple removing @elonmusk's Twitter from app store warrants Congressional response

"That would be a huge, huge mistake, and it would be a really raw exercise of monopolistic power that I think would merit a response from the United States Congress."

Mollie
@MZHemingway
One of the most INFURIATING things about the current moment is the utter and complete silence and weakness of roughly 100% of DC establishment Republicans. Every single elected GOP person with a brain and/or spine or even a freaking PULSE should be saying at least this much.

I don't have words for how much I loathe establishment GOP & its unfailing weakness and humiliating impotence in the face of the left's assaults. Desperate to fellate the media and other regime actors with performative gatekeeping instead of real action, they are beneath contempt

I can't wait to read National Review's thorough commentary on this.

And I know National Review will in fact take a strong position on the antitrust violations of its corporate sponsors, because Rich Lowry tells me that National Review, unlike Some Other Conservative Blogs, is "fearless."

Donald Trump Wants National Review to Die

By RICH LOWRY
November 21, 2022 6:30 AM

You can keep us strong.

Donald Trump issued, by his standards, a fairly mild denunciation of National Review the other day.

He didn't insult anyone's wife, give us a nickname, or say that the title of our magazine somehow sounds Chinese.

He only said that we are lightweights who serve no purpose and whose publication deserves to die.

If you think he has a point, the rest of this post is probably not for you.

If you think, to the contrary, that it's more important than ever to have a fearless voice speaking the truth to try to get the party past the cycle of failure and frustration currently gripping it -- thanks largely to the destructiveness of the 45th president -- then I'm hoping you will contribute to our little fundraising effort.

Our position in the Trump era hasn't necessarily been a popular one -- and certainly not an opportunistic one.

Say, Rich, I notice your little blog has almost completely embargoed any mention of the enormous proofs that have emerged that your corporate patrons colluded with the federal government to censors the speech of conservatives -- which makes this not a case of Precious Corporate Speech, as you routinely defend such censorship, but of Government Censorship Through Corporate Deputies.

Apart from allowing your news blogger to write up a story here or there as these bombshells have emerged, you haven't had any of your lawyer-bloggers explain to your readers that this puts your corporate donors' censorship actions in an entirely different category of legality.

It's almost as if people who work there know that they're not allowed to speak badly about FaceBook and Google.

But you're "fearless," right, Rich? You tell the truth no matter what the consequences? You tell the truth without fear or favor, right?

The dynamic of the past several years has been that if you lose your mind about Trump and allow him to unmoor you from your conservative foundations, you will get widely praised and have opportunities in the mainstream media that you wouldn't otherwise, and hard-core Never Trump and/or Democratic donors will fund your publication.

On the other hand, if you a find a way to evade or justify all of Trump's failings and allow him to unmoor you from your conservative foundations (just in a different way from the category of people above), you will be hailed for your bravery and handsomely rewarded by MAGA world.

If you eschew both of those approaches and are happy to give Trump credit where it's due and maintain all your preexisting conservative commitments, but call out Trump as warranted and warn of his deleterious political effects, well, then, you are condemned as quislings or cowards by both the "Never" and "Always" factions.

How much money do you make for pretending for three fucking years to not notice that your primary donors are illegally colluding with government to censor the speech of your readers?

I'm not complaining. I think the ground NR has staked out is principled, prudent, and correct. The point is that no one would do it for self-serving reasons.

And, indeed, we haven't.

Except that your stupid little blog would go out of business if you upset your paymasters Google and FaceBook, so you don't upset them.

Rich boosts DeSantis here.

Does that mean that Lowry endorses DeSantis' notions that maybe Corporations don't have plenary power to limit citizen speech as the whim moves them? That maybe there are some limits on the censorship rights of Conservative, Inc.'s Holy Corporate Patrons? That maybe antitrust law is not, as Conservative, Inc. argues sub silentio, dead letter and just another part of the law that we ignore because "that's like a hundred years old, man"?

LOL, I doubt it.

"Fearless."

Fuck you, money-grubbing ridiculous gussied-up whore.

(don't write long "lolololol" or "hahahaha" strings in the comments, keep them 30 characters or fewer)

posted by Ace at 01:00 PM

| Access Comments