Big Tech DISASTER: After the hearings, what comes next?

During Wednesday's Senate committee hearing, Montana Democratic Senator Jon Tester called Big Tech “the unregulated Wild West that needs to be dealt with." He spent the rest of his seven minutes babbling incoherently, but the image is still relevant. The problem being, some Americans happen to love the Wild West. Some of us feel okay with individual freedom and personal autonomy.

Senators from both parties confronted the CEO's of Twitter, Facebook, and Google at the Section 230 Big Tech hearing. Every single person involved was excessively prepared. Except for Jack Dorsey. Perhaps because Dorsey, as CEO and co-founder of Twitter, found himself in the hot seat recently. Literally that morning, on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, page A1, was a story about how a feckless Dorsey was essentially ambushed by his own company “when with little explanation the platform he leads began blocking its millions of users from sharing links to a pair of New York Post stories about Joe Biden 's son, Hunter Biden. Within hours, lawmakers said they would subpoena Mr. Dorsey to explain his decision."

Maybe it was the nose ring, or the extra grey in his Fu Manchu, but Dorsey was blindsided. He was still fighting off embarrassment. Just a few days ago, he (rightfully) criticized his own company for their poor response to the Hunter Biden story. And you could practically read Dorsey's thoughts as he struggled to remain deadpan through the hearing.

Democrats repeatedly bemoaned the fact that the hearing was being held less than a week before the election — as if they were actually doing any campaigning anyway. They kept to their usual gaslighting. Accusing conservatives of being unstoppable conspiracy theorists. Republican senators were unwavering. If you closed your eyes and listened, it felt like a furious yet pitch-perfect sermon, one last concerted charge toward saving the republic.

Mike Lee, in particular, was a bulldog. Ted Cruz was like Zoro, swiping and attacking. Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn, fresh off the Amy Coney Barrett hearings, was even fresher than she was last week.

But here's what it was really about: Wednesday, the figurative public execution did not happen. Everybody was too well prepared. It was less of a Senate hearing, and more of a peek at some neglected downtown, windows boarded up. Ultimately, we were left wondering, what comes next?

Jack Dorsey, in particular, appeared tired or annoyed.

For too long to remember, what all of us have been nervously wondering is whether or not social media companies would screw up this election like they did in 2016. And at the hearing we saw them respond personally. Jack Dorsey, in particular, appeared tired or annoyed.

The hearing mostly focused on Dorsey and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

It was clear that both of them have been nervous about this election. That they've spent a lot of time worrying about it. They were skittish. These are the final moments of an entire American legacy. The gravity weighs on all of us. Nerves are frayed with everyone.

But, in moments of daunting pressure, we see a person's excellence appear or vanish. If someone can do their job under intense pressure, then we're impressed. We're relieved. Zuckerberg did fine — he's been through plenty of these hearings. Google CEO Sundar Pichai chimed in occasionally, but the focus of Senators' ire was on Twitter and Facebook.

Both companies have grown into empires, growing at a rate that nobody could keep up with. Yet benefitting exorbitantly from their own willing ignorance. They follow the mob, and Alex Jones is gone. Then Gavin McInness. Then a little closer. Then a little closer to you and me.

Going into the 2020 election, social media CEO's have been worried about “a Hack and Leak," a data-dump of hacked material that goes viral on their platforms, like Guccifer 2.0 in 2016, when an anonymous source released damning emails from the Democratic National Committee.

Facebook and Twitter were nervous about an “October Surprise," a last-minute dump of leaked documents that had the potential to sway the election. Everyone has been so skittish. Facebook employees even literally role-played drills on how to handle any situation that would influence the election.

If you can believe it, Facebook's was a far more actuarial response, more cautious, more subtle. They choked the newsfeed, revamping their ever-dubious algorithm. Straining to please everyone all at once.

Twitter's approach was more ... Twitter-like: Aggressively dumb yet unwaveringly confident. They would drop the ban hammer, blanket-banning links to supposed leaked information, and even suspending accounts that re-tweeted those links. Which is why, last week, we saw a ton of legacy bluecheck news outlets and journalists drop like flies for no more than sharing the Hunter Biden story.

Something is wrong when both sides are complaining about the same thing but blaming one another for it. The same time that we conservatives were pointing out obvious ideological bias by Big Tech against Donald Trump, a slew of progressive and liberal outlets were screaming ideological bias in favor of Donald Trump. An “expose" in the October 19th edition of the New Yorker claimed to expose rampant conservative favoritism, as if Silicon Valley were actually an assemblage of conservatives — which is clearly, provably false.

So when the Hunter Biden story broke, they sprung into action. Because, let's be honest, there are a lot of aspects of the whole story that don't make sense. The laptop. Guiliani's lawyers.

Twitter panicked. They attacked. They freaked out.

Facebook and Twitter responded to the Hunter Biden story with their new policies. All of it has played out like a cheap soap opera. Facebook tried to mute it. Twitter panicked. They attacked. They freaked out.

Both companies had readied for contingencies that involved hackers, criminals, extortionists. They were so skittish that they fired shots at noncombatants. Instead of hackers, they were attacking the nation's oldest daily paper, founded by Alexander Hamilton in 1801 — which was 218 years ago — a daily with the fourth largest distribution in the nation.

The laptop is real. The story is a tangle. And the social media response was a disaster. They told us not to look at the giant pink elephant. Guess where we are staring now?

But what direction should legislators take their investigation of Big Tech? What sort of policy changes should they offer? How would changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act affect conservative outlets? The legislation, passed into law in 1996, states that: “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

It is worth mentioning that the left also has a distrust for Big Tech. Harper's September cover story was “The Big Tech Extortion Racket," in which — remarkably — the author compares the fight against Big Tech to the Boston Tea Party, likening Big Tech to the British East India Company and their trade monopoly. But where conservatives take umbrage with anti-conservative bias, the left considers Big Tech to be authoritarian, or that Big Tech doesn't censor conservatives enough.

As usual, the problem here was one of self-awareness: The Democrats had none. They have devoted too many hours, or years, or even decades, monologuing into mirrors. Well, those tactics no longer work — Donald Trump changed that.

I can tell you what I know: Social justice is a system of endless diminishing. It keeps devouring itself into nonexistence. It has mutated into the monster it is because we have budged, and budged, and budged. But we cannot budge anymore.


Did the FBI just get away with the BIGGEST armed robbery in US history?

Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images

In 2021, an armed group broke into a U.S. Private Vaults store in Beverly Hills and stole $86 million worth of valuables — the largest armed robbery in U.S. history. That "armed group" was the FBI. Now, it appears that the FBI and U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles "misled" the judge who signed the warrant for the seizure and still haven't returned the stolen goods to the 700 customers affected, according to newly disclosed court filings.

The details of the government’s alleged deception have come to light in a class-action lawsuit by U.S. Private Vaults customers who say the raid violated their rights, the Los Angeles Times reported. The FBI and U.S. attorney’s office denied misleading the judge, and a spokesperson claimed the warrants were lawfully executed.

On the radio program, Glenn Beck and producer Stu Burguiere reviewed some of the shocking story's details and discussed why incidents like this may become more common.

"None of the customers have been charged with any crimes. Not a single customer, out of the 700, not a single customer has been charged with a crime, but they can't get their stuff back," Glenn noted. "And this is going to happen more and more."

"It's incomprehensible that this stuff goes on in the United States of America," Stu said. "If you were to tell me this happened, you know, in Russia, I'd expect it. The fact that the United States government is claiming and just taking stuff from citizens all around the country with no crime, many times without even being charged, let alone ... conviction."

"Listen to this," Glenn continued. "The lawsuit also claims that some of the box holders who came forward to reclaim their seized property were then subjected to another investigation. If you went to the FBI and said, 'I want my stuff back,' the FBI examined their bank accounts, their DMV records, their tax return, and any criminal history checks."

However, box holders who decided to forfeit their property were also suspected of trying to "avoid becoming an FBI target," Glenn noted.

"So, you're guilty if you walk away and you're guilty if you ask," Stu added.

"This is America, gang," Glenn said. "It doesn't seem like it because it's not a constitutional America. But this is the America we now live in, and it is important that you wake up and stand up. ... God's people have got to start standing up, or we'll lose freedom. The world's freedom will be on our heads."

Watch the video clip below to hear more from Glenn. Can't watch? Download the podcast here.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Glenn Beck: One TERRIFYING thing is clear no matter who caused the Nord Stream pipeline leaks

Photo by Danish Defence/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Evidence strongly suggests that the Nord Stream pipeline leaks were the result of sabotage, and U.S. and European officials have been working to discover who could be behind the explosions that damaged the natural gas pipelines running from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea.

Was it Russia? Ukraine? Germany? But no matter who carried this out, it has put the entire world in grave danger, because if this is indeed an attack, it means that non-military key infrastructure outside Ukraine is now on the "target menu," warned Glenn Beck on the radio program.

"It is so important for you to understand, this is now a non-military key infrastructure that has been destroyed," Glenn explained. "If Russia thinks we did it, they've already said, 'Nukes are now on the table.' That gives us a green light to use nukes," he added.

"This is non-military key infrastructure outside of the borders of Ukraine. To date, as far as we know, combat targets were either in Ukraine, or were military targets hit inside of Russia by Ukrainian Air Force or special forces. But the target menu now includes key civilian infrastructure: electricity, water utilities, energy production. That makes Russia more dangerous than ever. And that would be true no matter who carried out the attack," Glenn stated.

Now, the Russians are saying the Unted States did it, and the U.S. is saying it was Russia. But no matter who carried out the attack, "We are facing a Cuban Missile Crisis," said Glenn.

"This could end up being the biggest story of our lifetime and ... if it isn't played calmly by every side, this could be World War III," he continued. "Russia has already said that this gives them the right to use nuclear weapons as soon as they find out for sure who did it. That would be catastrophic, absolutely catastrophic."

Watch the video clip below to hear more from Glenn. Can't watch? Download the podcast here.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The White House can try to spin inflation all day long (and it's trying very hard). But you feel the effects of President Joe Biden’s disastrous leadership every time you go to the grocery store or fill up your car. The American economy is on the brink of disaster after less than two years of a Democrat-controlled Congress and White House. And they’ve got plenty more destruction in the works.

The bottom line is they WANT you to get used to a lower living standard. So, what do you do? How do you prepare? What will food and fuel cost in the months ahead? What would the next Great Depression look like? How are you going to feel the effects of ESG and the Left’s war on oil?

On Wednesday night's "Glenn TV," Glenn Beck brings in a panel of economic experts to answer those questions. He’s joined by Carol Roth, former Wall Street investment banker and author of “The War on Small Business,” and Jim Iuorio, a small business owner, stockbroker, and managing director of TJM Institutional Services. While both forecast the worst-case scenario for average Americans, they also offer a glimmer of hope to get us out of this mess.

Watch the full episode below:


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The FBI recently sent more than a dozen armed agents to the home of well-known pro-life activist Mark Houck to arrest him for allegedly violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances or FACE Act. Now the father of seven faces up to 11 years in prison over claims that he blocked a man from entering an abortion clinic and shoved him when he wouldn't stop verbally harassing Mark's 12-year-old son. Now, if that doesn't sound insane enough, this all happened after local authorities dropped the case. So, what's the full story here?

Attorney Peter Breen joined Glenn Beck on the radio program Tuesday to tell the family's side of the story, including how the case was already "won" three years ago, and how, after receiving a target letter from the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Mark's legal team agreed to cooperate fully, only to hear nothing back until the day the FBI showed up on Mark's doorstep.

Breen also explained how the FBI has tried to downplay "abuse of power" claims, accusing Mark's wife of making "inaccurate claims" about the terrifying experience.

"Ryan-Marie, who is Mark's wife, she thought she saw 25 [FBI agents.] The FBI came back and said it wasn't 25, it was no more than 15 or 20 heavily armed federal agents. And she had called them a 'SWAT team' because she's a lay person. I don't know the difference between a SWAT team and a bunch of heavily armed, armored, and shield-bearing federal agents," Breen said.

According to Fox News, a senior FBI source said:

There may have been 15-20 agents at the scene, but denied 25 were there. The agents who came to the door had guns out and at the ready, according to this FBI source, but the guns were never pointed at Houck or his family and were lowered or holstered as soon as Houck was taken into custody. Houck was handcuffed with a belly chain.

"So, yeah, they had guns drawn and pointed at Mark in front of his wife and their children. And that whole show of force was done against a man who was not a drug lord, not a mafia boss, but instead, a law-abiding pillar of the community whose attorney said, 'we'll bring him in if you decide to charge, even though you have no case.'"

Breen went on to assert that he believes Congress "needs to" hold Attorney General Merrick Garland accountable for the arrest. "I can't imagine that those 20 federal agents were excited about being called out to a peaceful man's home, guns drawn," he said.

In the video clip below, Breen goes on the explain what he believes should happen next, and why Houck's arrest "should frighten all of us." Can't watch? Download the podcast here.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.