Video: “There’s Nothing Smart About You” Trump Tells Biden

The gloves are off in the first round of presidential debates with President Trump calling out Joe Biden’s intelligence:

“Don’t ever use the word smart with me. There is nothing smart about you Joe,” the president said causing households across America to burst out in laughter.

Video: Internet Censors Purge Posts Shared By President Trump Detailing African American Crime Statistics

The President Shared A Video From Another User Who Uploaded An Explanation Given By A Black Man About Crime From His Own Demographic…Twitter Promptly Deleted The Account

Earlier today, President Trump shared a number of videos from Twitter user “Always Actions” that discussed crime in the United States.

Among those videos was a description of crime perpetrated by the black community in which a black man explains to an anti-Trump white woman, that black people are responsible for over 50% of all violent gun crime despite only constituting roughly 13% of the population. This data is taken directly from the FBI’s own findings on crime in the United States.

The video was originally posted in July and had only received modest attention until Trump gave it a bump earlier this morning. Within three hours of his retweet, the account had been banned by Twitter ostensibly for violating some undisclosed community standards provision.

Here’s the video they deleted:

Thankfully, the video was screen recorded and reuploaded by another user. Nationalist Review has downloaded a copy of this copy and, should the account that reposted it be banned, we will upload it.

“African Americans make up 13% of the population, yet commit over 50% of the violent gun crime. No—no, no, that’s true. 55%,” the man begins. “So, 95% of that is to other blacks. So me, as an African American, I have a 2,000 times more likelihood to be shot and killed by another black man leaving this event, than I do by a white person, a police officer, or a neo-Nazi.”

“Us African Americans, we’re killing each other. I’m being honest with you, that’s what the problem is. I’m being honest. If Obama would’ve stood up and said look, ‘we’re killing each other, we’ve got a problem within the African American community,” he would have been phenomenal.”

“I’m 2,000 times more likely to be shot and killed by another black man, leaving this event today—tonight—than I am any other race, color, creed or police officer. That’s where the f***ing pain comes, man. That’s sad. I can’t hang out in black neighborhoods. I can’t do that. Because its a risk to me. That’s sad.”

Breaking: “Wrong Trump” Trends After President’s Younger Brother Dies While Liberals Wish It Was Donald

Robert Trump, 72, Has Died After Being Admitted To The New York Presbyterian Center . . . Liberals Are Using The Opportunity To Wish Death On President Donald Trump

The President’s younger brother has unfortunately succumbed to an undisclosed illness after being admitted to the hospital on Friday. President Trump visited Robert, his younger brother, that evening.

“I have a wonderful brother,” Trump said at a briefing Friday. “We’ve had a great relationship for a long time, from day one. It’s a long time ago. And he’s in the hospital right now. And hopefully he’ll be alright, but he is pretty—he’s having a hard time. I am going to the hospital. I hope he is okay.”

Now, with the news of his brother’s passing released, liberals are taking the opportunity to fire shots at the president wishing he had died instead. The tweets have already collectively garnered thousands of retweets and likes. (screenshots below)

President Trump Issued The Following Statement:

“It is with heavy heart I share that my wonderful brother, Robert, peacefully passed away tonight. He was not just my brother, he was my best friend. He will be greatly missed, but we will meet again. His memory will live on in my heart forever. Robert, I love you. Rest in peace.”

Liberals React With Mercilessness Contempt:

Antifa And BLM Planning Violent Protests For Trump’s Birthday “Send Him To His Bunker”

Agitators In Washington, D.C. and Seattle Plan To “Send Trump To His Bunker” On June 14th According To Posts On Official Communication Channels Organizing The Protests

An unaffiliated Black Lives Matter organization in Seattle, Washington and an Antifa group in Washington, D.C. are planning to launch riots on the president’s birthday this Sunday.

The demonstrations were announced on Telegram channels associated with the organizations, with one group urging participants to put their “anger into action” and the other implying they will scare President Trump into hiding in the bunker once again.

At the time of this report, Black Lives Matter Seattle Original (BLMSO), the Seattle-based organization has raised a total exceeding $21,000 in donations to support the effort and 5,000 people have indicated on their Facebook event page that they plan to attend.

Still, the event is not without some confusion or internal controversy, since there are apparently two unaffiliated BLM organizations in the Seattle area. The organization planning the riot is the less official of the two and lacks the non-profit status of the competing group known as Black Lives Matter Seattle King County (BLMSKC). BLMSKC has actually released their own statement urging activists to avoid the event hosted by the other group:

“So, to clarify, Black Lives Matter Seattle King County is not involved in the coordination or planning of any public, in-person gatherings, meetings, or protests, which includes any events planned for June 14th,” they wrote in their statement.

Meanwhile, the Washington DC protest has been advertised on Telegram as a means to send Trump back into his bunker and eventually chase him out of office. In a bombastically absurd Instagram post they made their case for the need to riot:

What is the Fitting Way to “Celebrate” Trump’s Birthday?
Sunday June 14, 4 PM, Lafayette Park in DC and everywhere

On the first day of mass protests in DC, Trump hid himself away in his underground bunker out of fear of the people’s power. Our power is in the streets! Demand #TrumpPenceOutNOW! This fascist regime poses a catastrophic danger to the whole world, and the whole world will take heart if we rise to another level of determined resistance. We have begun, but should we fail to see it through, this and every struggle for justice will be set back. If we succeed – and we can succeed – we can begin to force the boots of violent oppressors off the necks of our brothers and sisters. Let us change the course of history, not for ourselves alone but for all humanity.

We’ll continue monitoring these planned events and update you as more information comes to light.

Breaking: For First Time Ever, Twitter CEO Has Directly Censored The President’s Tweet

Twitter has made the unprecedented move of censoring one of the president’s tweets claiming that it violated the site’s terms of service. Twitter users can no longer “like, retweet, or comment” on the post.

UPDATE: President Trump has responded to Twitter’s latest act of censorship

In what can only be direct retaliation for the president’s recently announced Executive Order wherein he promised to take action against tech censorship, Twitter has fired a major shot across the president’s bow by censoring one of his tweets, blocking comments on it, and disabling the ability of individuals to retweet it. Twitter has recently experimented with putting “fact-checking” bubbles under the President’s tweets, but actually cutting off users’ ability to retweet, like and comment on Trump’s tweet was previously completely unheard of.

In an address earlier today, President Trump promised to create an online environment where free speech and the diversity of ideas—the only diversity that matters—can prosper. For those interested, we put together a brief summary where you can read about the Executive Order and see a breakdown of its provisions.

Earlier today the president tweeted the following about the riots taking place in Minneapolis (and now across the country):

“These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!”

In order to access this tweet, users must go directly to Donald Trump’s Twitter profile and opt-in to view the contents.

“This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible. Learn more.”

This step, which Twitter has haphazardly taken, is perhaps the only thing that will guarantee that the president will not let up his crusade against tech censorship. Countless members of his base have seen their accounts banned, suspended, and isolated using algorithms built around Twitter’s political bias. But, love him or hate him, President Trump will not let his own account be tampered with. It can be guaranteed now that he will take every action possible to safeguard speech online. This battle is just beginning.

The decision to lock this tweet down seems to have come directly from the top, with Twitter’s CEO, Jack Dorsey, retweeting a Twitter Comms bulletin about their decision to censor the leader of the “free” world.

Twitter’s Communications team has issued the following statement regarding their decision:

“This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today. We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance. As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”

Here’s how Trump’s tweet looks after you click to access it:

Summary: Trump Issues Executive Order On Social Media Censorship, And It’s Excellent

President Trump issues executive order on “Preventing Online Censorship”

On Thursday, President Trump delivered on a long overdue promise to get a grip on the censorship of tech oligarchs on major platforms such as Twitter, YouTube, Facebook and Instagram. After months of promising to “monitor the situation” it seems that Twitter’s expedition into directly censoring the president’s tweets has triggered a response. So, on behalf of America, thank you for screwing up so badly, Jack Dorsey.

The entirety of the order may be read here, but a more digestible breakdown of the main points may be read below. In brief, the president is utilizing the full force of the executive branch and all tools at his disposal to combat the stifling threat of censorship on social media platforms. He’s ordered the Attorney General, Secretary of Commerce, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, and all other government department and agencies to take action.

Where a so-called platform (defined below) oversteps its authority to remove harmful content without liability, he’s seeking out methods to strip them of their Section 230 immunity. Where government agencies are spending taxpayer dollars on such platforms, he’s demanding that an assessment be made as to whether they should continue marketing their programs and thereby funding the tech oligarchs in the process. He’s even dispatching the Attorney General to determine if any state laws can be used to combat the censorship occurring on sites like Facebook and Twitter.

Twitter recently crossed a very bold line by adding fact checking disclaimers to the president’s tweets about mail-in voting. As a result, President Trump promised to take action. And today, he followed through.

The executive order is the best first step that Americans could hope for

“This practice [of online censorship] is fundamentally un-American and anti-democratic.”

The order begins by outlining the Trump Administration’s philosophy on free speech as a necessity for involvement in the republic and the dangerous influence of the consolidation of internet traffic to a select few number of sites. “In a country that has long cherished the freedom of expression,” it reads, “we cannot allow a limited number of online platforms to hand pick the speech that Americans may access on the internet.”

Arguing that the platforms are the modern equivalent to the “public square,” Trump’s order states the platforms have deceptively gone beyond their published Terms of Service agreements in a “manner that clearly reflects political bias.”

Meanwhile, it continues, despite creating “groundless justifications to censor or otherwise restrict Americans’ speech here at home,” these platforms are often caught doing the bidding of foreign governments, such as the Communist Party in China. Just recently, YouTube was caught censoring any criticism of the Communist Party’s internet propaganda arm, deleting tens of thousands of comments and videos that criticized the regime, as District Herald reported.

Without referring to a specific American business by name, the order clearly refers to Alphabet (Google and YouTube’s parent company), when it references a tech company that “also established research partnerships in China that provide direct benefits to the Chinese military.”

So what sort of policy does the Executive Order actually initiate? Read on!

It is the policy of the United States to foster clear ground rules promoting free and open debate on the internet.

Trump’s order argues that social media sites like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube have violated their immunity from liability under Sec. 230 of the Communications Decency Act

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides immunity from liability to online platforms that do not engage in editorializing or content creation of their own. The theory is simple: if you set up a website and allow people to come and post their own viewpoints, any illegal content posted by them—such as threats or pornography depicting minors—can’t be used to hold them criminally liable.

The rule was issued to allow these platforms to remove harmful content without themselves being deemed a publisher and was issued to address “early court decisions holding that, if an online platform restricted access to some content posted by others, it would thereby become a ‘publisher’ of all the content posted on its site for purposes of torts such as defamation.”

“but in reality [social media platforms] use their power over a vital means of communication to engage in deceptive or pretextual actions stifling free and open debate by censoring certain viewpoints.”

Article Continues Below – – If you support Independent Journalism, please take a moment to sign up for our newsletter!
We are also currently running a giveaway of an authentic musket ball from the Revolutionary War. You can enter for a chance to win here. (No Purchase Necessry)

In reality, however, social media sites have used this limited immunity from liability to shield themselves while taking deceptive action to remove political speech they find unfavorable. These so-called platforms are, in effect, “far from acting in “good faith” to remove objectionable content,” and instead have been stifling viewpoints with which they disagree.

Trump Argues That Twitter, Facebook, Youtube and Instagram should lose their limited liability shield due to deceptive bad behavior:

“When an interactive computer service provider removes or restricts access to content and its actions do not meet the criteria of subparagraph (c)(2)(A), it is engaged in editorial conduct. It is the policy of the United States that such a provider should properly lose the limited liability shield of subparagraph (c)(2)(A) and be exposed to liability like any traditional editor and publisher that is not an online provider.”

The Executive Order on censorship commands the Attorney General and Secretary of Commerce to file a petition with the Federal Communications Commission

“In addition, within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), in consultation with the Attorney General, and acting through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), shall file a petition for rulemaking with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requesting that the FCC expeditiously propose regulations.”

“Determine the circumstances under which a provider of an interactive computer service that restricts access to content in a manner not specifically protected by subparagraph (c)(2)(A) may also not be able to claim protection under subparagraph (c)(1), which merely states that a provider shall not be treated as a publisher or speaker for making third-party content available and does not address the provider’s responsibility for its own editorial decisions”

“[Define] the conditions under which an action restricting access to or availability of material is not ‘taken in good faith’.”

Trump’s order also declares an intention to cease spending money for advertising on these platforms

The head of each executive department and agency (agency) shall review its agency’s Federal spending on advertising and marketing paid to online platforms. Such review shall include the amount of money spent, the online platforms that receive Federal dollars, and the statutory authorities available to restrict their receipt of advertising dollars. Within 30 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall report its findings to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

The Department of Justice shall review the viewpoint-based speech restrictions imposed by each online platform identified in the report described in subsection (b) of this section and assess whether any online platforms are problematic vehicles for government speech due to viewpoint discrimination, deception to consumers, or other bad practices.

It is the policy of the United States that large online platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, as the critical means of promoting the free flow of speech and ideas today, should not restrict protected speech.

Mobilizing the Federal Trade Commission to see if social media sites have been misrepresenting themselves to their users and hurting the bottom line of other American businesses in the process

“The FTC shall consider taking action, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, pursuant to section 45 of title 15, United States Code. Such unfair or deceptive acts or practice may include practices by entities covered by section 230 that restrict speech in ways that do not align with those entities’ public representations about those practices.”

He is authorizing the Attorney General to review and assist in the enforcement of applicable state laws that prohibit platforms from engaging in unfair practices

“The Attorney General shall establish a working group regarding the potential enforcement of State statutes that prohibit online platforms from engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices. The working group shall also develop model legislation for consideration by legislatures in States where existing statutes do not protect Americans from such unfair and deceptive acts and practices. The working group shall invite State Attorneys General for discussion and consultation, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.”

It orders the Attorney General to develop proposals for Federal legislation that will deter further acts of online censorship

“The Attorney General shall develop a proposal for Federal legislation that would be useful to promote the policy objectives of this order.”

He really was monitoring the situation, here’s a breakdown of deceptive practices the order is looking into:

(i) increased scrutiny of users based on the other users they choose to follow, or their interactions with other users;

(ii) algorithms to suppress content or users based on indications of political alignment or viewpoint;

(iii) differential policies allowing for otherwise impermissible behavior, when committed by accounts associated with the Chinese Communist Party or other anti-democratic associations or governments;

(iv) reliance on third-party entities, including contractors, media
organizations, and individuals, with indicia of bias to review content; and

(v) acts that limit the ability of users with particular viewpoints to earn money on the platform compared with other users similarly situated.

Trump Just Told These Unconstitutional 37 Bi-Partisan Senators To Take A Hike For Violating Americans’ Privacy

Trump To Veto Warrantless FISA Surveillance Of Americans, These 37 Senators Want It Passed

As Nationalist Review just reported, President Trump has promised to veto an unconstitutional legislative package that would allow law enforcement agencies to monitor the electronic communications of American citizens without a warrant. Below is a list of the Senators that voted to continue the warrantless surveillance.

Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of Americans’ and foreigners’ phone calls, text messages, emails, and other electronic communications. Information collected under the law without a warrant can be used to prosecute and imprison people, even for crimes that have nothing to do with national security. Given our nation’s history of abusing its surveillance authorities, and the secrecy surrounding the program, we should be concerned that Section 702 is and will be used to disproportionately target disfavored groups, whether minority communities, political activists, or even journalists.

Republicans (27):

Barrasso, John (R-WY)
Blackburn, Marsha (R-TN)
Blunt, Roy (R-MO)
Boozman, John (R-AR)
Burr, Richard (R-NC)
Capito, Shelley Moore (R-WV)
Collins, Susan M. (R-ME)
Cornyn, John (R-TX)
Cotton, Tom (R-AR)
Fischer, Deb (R-NE)
Graham, Lindsey (R-SC)
Hyde-Smith, Cindy (R-MS)
Inhofe, James M. (R-OK)
Johnson, Ron (R-WI)
Lankford, James (R-OK)
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY)
Perdue, David (R-GA)
Portman, Rob (R-OH)
Roberts, Pat (R-KS)
Romney, Mitt (R-UT)
Rubio, Marco (R-FL)
Shelby, Richard C. (R-AL)
Thune, John (R-SD)
Tillis, Thom (R-NC)
Toomey, Patrick J. (R-PA)
Wicker, Roger F. (R-MS)
Young, Todd (R-IN)

Democrats (10):

Carper, Thomas R. (D-DE)
Casey, Robert P., Jr. (D-PA)
Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA)
Hassan, Margaret Wood (D-NH)
Jones, Doug (D-AL)
Kaine, Tim (D-VA)
Manchin, Joe, III (D-WV)
Shaheen, Jeanne (D-NH)
Warner, Mark R. (D-VA)
Whitehouse, Sheldon (D-RI)

Breaking: Trump To Veto FISA Bill If Passed By Congress

President Trump declared his intention to veto the FISA Bill if it passes the House tonight.

In a big win for privacy-conscious Americans, President Trump has signaled his intention to veto the FISA bill currently up for a vote in the lower chamber. Earlier, to the universal disdain of almost all political ideologies, the Senate pushed through the now-infamous Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act section of the equally disdained PATRIOT Act.

A brief rundown on what we’re talking about:

Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of Americans’ and foreigners’ phone calls, text messages, emails, and other electronic communications. Information collected under the law without a warrant can be used to prosecute and imprison people, even for crimes that have nothing to do with national security. Given our nation’s history of abusing its surveillance authorities, and the secrecy surrounding the program, we should be concerned that Section 702 is and will be used to disproportionately target disfavored groups, whether minority communities, political activists, or even journalists.

Previously, the Senate pushed through the bill without altering language that allowed the FBI to monitor the internet usage of Americans without first getting a warrant—an invasion of privacy that many feel is also a violation of the 4th Amendment.

On 13 May, the Senate rejected an amendment to the bill which would have required law enforcement to seek a warrant when they wished to monitor the web browsing, electronic communications, and search history of Americans. In a 59-37 vote, the measure fell just shy of the 60 votes needed to pass. Among the Senators who struck down the amendment that would have insulated the privacy rights of their constituents were Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) and Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va).

Now, with the bill headed to the House floor, the President has sent out an explosive warning to the lower chamber: he will not sign it.

“If the FISA Bill is passed tonight on the House floor, I will quickly VETO it,” the president tweeted. “Our Country has just suffered through the greatest political crime in its history. The massive abuse of FISA was a big part of it!”

The House previously reauthorized the PATRIOT Act provisions, sending the bill to the Senate for their input. Upon revisions from the Senate, the bill was returned to the House for further review. The House has begun considering proposals that would alter the language to protect the privacy rights of Americans. This would send the bill back to the Senate if successful.

FISA’s roots trace back to the 1970s during the Watergate-era during which an unfortunate and traitorous ruling by the Supreme Court decided that the privacy rights of Americans didn’t apply when information they transmitted was stored by a third party. Today, that third party often means an internet service provider.

This is a developing story and this article will be updated as more information comes to light.

UPDATE: President Trump Responds To Twitter’s Election Interference

Trump Says He Will “Not Allow” Twitter’s Election Interference To Continue

Moments ago, Nationalist Review published an article explaining Twitter’s recent foray into election interference. In an unprecedented act of political manipulation, the social media giant headed by Jack Dorsey began adding fact-checking disclaimers to the president’s tweets. These fact-checking bubbles led to quotes from highly partisan outlets such as Jeff Bezo’s Washington Post and CNN.

Now, President Trump has responded on Twitter, shooting a shot across the tech oligarch’s bow:


“Twitter is now interfering in the 2020 Presidential Election. They are saying my statement on Mail-In Ballots, which will lead to massive corruption and fraud, is incorrect, based on fact-checking by Fake News CNN and the Amazon Washington Post. Twitter is completely stifling FREE SPEECH, and I, as President, will not allow it to happen!”

This is a developing story and Nationalist Review will continue to update it progresses.

While You’re Here, Enter Our Sweepstakes:

Alert: Twitter Caught Engaging In 2020 Election Manipulation

Twitter Begins To “Fact-Check” Tweets Posted By President Donald Trump, Leading To Information From CNN and The Washington Post

We’ve released an update to this story.

On Tuesday morning, President Trump expressed his distaste for the proposal of an expansion of the mail-in ballot program. “There is NO WAY (ZERO!) that Mail-In Ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent,” he tweeted.

“Mail boxes will be robbed, ballots will be forged & even illegally printed out & fraudulently signed. The Governor of California is sending Ballots to millions of people, anyone living in the state, no matter who they are or how they got there, will get one. That will be followed up with professionals telling all of these people, many of whom have never even thought of voting before, how, and for whom, to vote. This will be a Rigged Election. No way!”

Not long after his tweet was posted, however, Twitter added a large blue flag to his tweets that prompted users to get the “facts” about mail-in ballots. The link led to a Twitter news briefing that compiled a list of sources they curated as authoritative including evidently partisan outlets such as The Washington Post and CNN. Twitter made the decision to publish this intrusive and manipulative fact-checking editorial on the same day that a story was released in West Virginia citing election fraud being carried out by an employee of the US Postal Service.

Twitter is the primary source of communication between the president and the American people. He is perhaps the first politician to ever fully utilize social media to the fullest extent possible and it seems that the tech oligarchs in Silicon Valley are doing whatever they can to prevent his success in the 2020 election.

A sampling of Twitter’s fact-checking editorial can be read below:

On Tuesday, President Trump made a series of claims about potential voter fraud after California Governor Gavin Newsom announced an effort to expand mail-in voting in California during the COVID-19 pandemic. These claims are unsubstantiated, according to CNN, Washington Post and others. Experts say mail-in ballots are very rarely linked to voter fraud.

– Trump falsely claimed that mail-in ballots would lead to “a Rigged Election.” However, fact-checkers say there is no evidence that mail-in ballots are linked to voter fraud.

– Trump falsely claimed that California will send mail-in ballots to “anyone living in the state, no matter who they are or how they got there.” In fact, only registered voters will receive ballots.

– Though Trump targeted California, mail-in ballots are already used in some states, including Oregon, Utah and Nebraska.

Trump’s Tweets “are a refrain we’ve heard over and over from Trump over the past four years — a refrain that literally has never been substantiated.” — Washington Post

“[T]he sort of widespread election fraud that Trump is talking about is incredibly rare. In fact, there’s just no significant evidence of intentional voter fraud on anything near the scale Trump and his allies allege.” — CNN

Here’s how the tweet appears on the website.

The massively popular social media network enjoys Sec. 230 protections from the Federal government—but does their intervention in the president’s tweets justify that continuing?

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is ostensibly meant to protect internet intermediaries—service providers who do not act as editorializing publishers—immunity from the liability of the content users independently share on their website. The theory is, that these service providers are not themselves engaging in content creation or curation. With Twitter interceding to inject the president’s tweets with disclaimers, there’s an argument to be made for throwing their immunity out the window. They already abuse this immunity by selectively purging conservative voices from the internet.

While you’re here, enter our sweepstakes!