Trump WINS Appeal Requiring Migrants To “Remain In Mexico”

Published on May 8, 2019

Trump WINS Appeal Requiring Migrants To “Remain In Mexico.” Once again there was a legal challenge to stop Donald Trump’s “remain in mexico” program but once again Trump has won. In an unusual victory for Trump ‘remain in mexico’ remains and asylum claimants will be required to wait in Mexico while asylum claims are being processed. Conservatives argue that most asylum seekers do not qualify and many don’t turn up for court “disappearing into the US.” The left argues that we should expand asylum to cover more issues instead of certain protected classes. As migrant caravans continue to move toward the US the issue of the migrant crisis is gaining more attention with even the New York Times editorial board siding with Trump and telling Congress to give him the money he is asking for. With Trump decrying illegal immigration as a key issue for his past and upcoming campaigns this will be a huge victory toward the Trump agenda.

Screen Shot 2019-05-08 at 3.25.08 PM

Leftist Activists Force Mastercard to Vote On Blacklisting The ‘Far Right’

By Chris Menahan

The ability to buy and sell goods and services may soon require folks to hold the “right” politically correct beliefs. 

From Tim Pool:

Activist group “The Sum Of Us” has successfully forced Mastercard to hold a vote that would see the creation of a “human rights committee” to oversee who uses the Mastercard service.

The goal of the leftist activist group is to shut down access for ‘far right’ groups as well as politicians and activists. They stress that stopping to flow of income will stop people they do not agree with.

This may be the most dramatic escalation in the Culture War we have seen yet, the targeting of major financial institutions to shut down opposition. While it sounds noble to ban certain groups we do not like it won’t end there. Massive multi national corporations should not have the right to sever access to basic services based on bad opinions.

Far left social justice activists have pushed for restrictions and censorship and this news marks the most dramatic escalation we have seen yet.

More from Breitbart:

In its supporting statement, ThisIsUs wrote:

Companies can face risks related to human rights even when they only perform support functions. Internet infrastructure companies like web host GoDaddy, social media platform Facebook and payments firm PayPal have come under pressure for doing business with or providing a forum for neo-Nazis and other hate groups. Mastercard has received negative publicity for processing of payments to white supremacist groups. “Organizers Catch Credit Card Companies Profiting From White Supremacy: Online payment companies are complicit in authorizing transactions related to hate groups,” AlterNet, August 22, 2017; and “Color Of Change Is Attacking Hate Groups At The Source: Their Funding,” Fast Company, August 21, 2017. According to the website bloodmoney.org (accessed on December 18, 2018), Mastercard continues to process payments for organizations such as American Border Patrol, League of the South, Proud Boys and Stormfront.

In response, the board of Mastercard recommended that stockholders vote against the proposal, stating that the company operates on the principle that consumers should be able to make “all lawful purchases.”

The Proposal focuses on the use of our products by certain organizations. We operate our network on the principle that consumers should be able to make all lawful purchases, and our franchise rules ensure compliance with the laws pertaining to the acceptable use of our payment processing services by merchants, acquirers and issuers. We regularly monitor activities involving our products and services for any alleged illegal use. When we process payment transactions, we do not have visibility into goods that are purchased or the use of those goods. When we are made aware of illegal activity or rules violations, we work closely with law enforcement and acquirers to shut down those activities.

Accordingly, because Mastercard has a committee with oversight over issues of corporate social responsibility and has disclosed its commitment to and oversight of human rights issues, the Board does not believe that establishing a separate human rights committee is necessary to properly exercise its oversight of this important area, nor does it add to Mastercard’s existing commitment to social responsibility and human rights.Therefore, our Board recommends that our stockholders vote AGAINST this joint proposal.

Although Mastercard’s board says it is committed to the principle of allowing “all lawful purchases,” online payments platform Patreon says that Mastercard asked it to withdraw service from Islam critic Robert Spencer, founder of JihadWatch.org, in August 2018.

Mastercard has yet to respond to a Breitbart News inquiry into why, if Patreon’s allegation is true, the company used its influence to cut off Spencer.

Multiple cases with Mastercard, Chase Bank and Bank of America suggest these megabanks are already doing a “belief check.”

Project Veritas Slams Twitter Execs’ Spying Claims

See the source image

Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde claim direct messages aren’t monitored

Thursday, March 07, 2019

Twitter founder Jack Dorsey and chief legal officer Vijaya Gadde told podcast host Joe Rogan that direct messages on the social media site are not monitored — a claim challenged by investigative journalist James O’Keefe of Project Veritas.

When asked by Rogan if company employees “read direct messages,” Dorsey replied, “We don’t read direct messages.”

Gadde followed up, explaining that the only direct messages read by employees are those which have been reported to Twitter support.

Rogan pressed further, asking if it was possible for Twitter employees to intentionally peruse a user’s direct messages.

“I don’t think so,” Gadde replied.

However, according to multiple Twitter engineers who discussed the subject of direct messages with undercover Project Veritas journalists, Dorsey and Gadde may have been misleading with their answers, at best.

“There’s teams dedicated to it [reading direct messages],” said Clay Haynes, a senior network security engineer at Twitter. “I mean, we’re talking… at least three or four hundred people… they’re paid to look at dick pics.”

“It is creepy Big Brother.”

Pranay Singh, a direct messaging engineer, revealed that all content shared on the platform — including private messages — are stored on Twitter servers for analytical and advertising purposes.

“So all your sex messages and your dick pics are on my server now,” Singh said. “Everything. Anything you post online.”

“A machine is going to look at it. An algorithm will look at it, and they’ll make a virtual profile about you.”

Watch the full exchange here.

‘We were way too aggressive’: Twitter CEO admits conservatives were targeted

CAP

Twitter co-founder and CEO Jack Dorsey addressed claims his social media platform had targeted conservatives, admitted they had likely acted too swiftly in banning some right-wing users, and failed to explain their reasons.

In conversation with podcast host Joe Rogan, Dorsey and his chief legal officer Vijaya Gadde fielded questions and criticisms regarding widespread accusations of the company catering to liberal viewpoints.

“Probably our team having a lack of context into actually what’s happening” Dorsey explained. “We would fully admit we probably were way too aggressive when we first saw this as well, and made mistakes.”

The controversy surrounding the social media giant came after conservatives and those expressing conservative viewpoints complained their accounts had been suspended for ideological reasons. Columbia University researcher Richard Hanania recently published an analysis showing that, of the 22 public figures banned by Twitter in the last few years, 21 were Trump supporters.

Conspiracy theory talk show host and Trump supporter Alex Jones (who, ironically, was on Rogan’s show just a few days ago) had his account suspended last year, alongside other figures like right wing activist Laura Loomer and GOP congressional candidate Jesse Kelly. In Kelly’s case, the company failed to explain the ban, even after Kelly’s account was later reinstated.

ALSO ON RT.COMIraq War vet who called out social media censorship booted from Twitter

“A lot of where we have failed is explaining the ‘why’ behind our policy and reasons,” Dorsey admitted, promising to look into alleged excesses.

As a case example of the kind of bias in question, Rogan and his fellow guest journalist Tim Pool brought up the company’s policy against “misgenderding,” a term for referring to or addressing Transgender people as something other than the gender they identify with. Canadian Feminist Megan Murphy was recent booted from Twitter over accusations she had “misgendered” her opponent in a debate.

Gadde explained that the rule in question was only enforced if a specific person is repeatedly targeted in a way that could be considered harassment. Tim Pool was unconvinced.

“You’re biased, and you’re targeting specific individuals because your rules support this perspective,” he argued, suggesting that the rule itself reflected a liberal viewpoint.

“You have essentially created a protected class,” Rogan chimed in, highlighting how the company’s claims to political neutrality are undermined by the one-sided way it has enforced its policy against “targeted harassment.”

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑