But, but it is not unconstitutional to ask a private company to do what would be unconstitutional for us to do ourselves…In the, "they never stop until the head is cut off" section, there is now this report of what has been transpiring at the Department of Homeland Security (man that homeland thing still makes my skin crawl).
Here are a couple of "give you shivers" tidbits.
"Emails and documents obtained by the outlet detailed just how closely DHS was working with the social media companies.
Emails obtained in a federal lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry over purported collaboration between the government and social media companies to censor or suppress speech indicate what appears to be coordination between dozens of federal administration officials and social media executives on how to address information regarding COVID-19 and a range of other content.“The discovery provided so far demonstrates that this Censorship Enterprise is extremely broad,” Schmitt and Landry said in a joint statement."
"In January 2021, CISA replaced the Countering Foreign Influence Task force with the “Misinformation, Disinformation and Malinformation” team, which was on the lookout for all types of disinformation.Because CISA must adhere to Americans’ right to free speech under the First Amendment, leaked meeting minutes show that Geoff Hale, the director of the Election Security Initiative at CISA, went as far as to recommend the use of third-party information-sharing nonprofits as a “clearing house for trust information to avoid the appearance of government propaganda.”"
So am I to understand that Federal Government employees who generally take an oath to the Constitution cannot figure out the Preamble to the Bill of Rights, and the text of the First Amendment? Are they really that stupid, or are they really just that subversive and evil? At this point, I don't see there being many other options.
...in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added...
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abriding the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
So if Congress created the DHS by law, and authorized the above reported actions (directly or indirectly, it doesn't matter). Then is not every member of Congress who voted for such law not directly liable for violating their oath of office and for denying Americans First Amendment Rights under color of law?
I may need to go check my supply of rope. May need to get some more.