Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘SEAN DAVIS’

Mollie Hemingway Delivers Masterclass Explainer on The ‘Government-Funded’ War on Free Speech


By: Shawn Fleetwood | March 25, 2025

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2025/03/25/mollie-hemingway-delivers-masterclass-explainer-on-the-government-funded-war-on-free-speech/

Mollie Hemingway testifying before Congress.
‘They know our voice is so powerful and influential that they can’t accomplish their goals unless they shut us down. They will not succeed.’

Author Shawn Fleetwood profile

Shawn Fleetwood

Visit on Twitter@ShawnFleetwood

More Articles

Americans constitutionally protected right to free speech “has been under worse attack in the last decade than at any other point in our nation’s history,” Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway told lawmakers during a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on Tuesday.

“The tentacles of the censorship-industrial complex are choking out freedom of expression, debate, and the right to criticize powerful institutions such as corporate media and the government,” Hemingway said.

Throughout her opening statement, The Federalist’s editor-in-chief highlighted how the federal and state governments have “fund[ed] and promote[d] censorship and blacklisting technology,” and have even gone as far as to “direct Big Tech companies to censor American speech and debate.” She specifically cited how academic institutions “such as Stanford University and the University of Texas are given large grants, not to defend free speech, but to conduct research on so-called ‘disinformation’ for use by the censorship regime.”

“Non-profit think tanks such as the Aspen Institute post so-called ‘disinformation’ seminars to groom journalists to publish pro-censorship propaganda and to suppress important stories, such as the Hunter Biden laptop bombshell,” Hemingway said. “Non-profit censorship groups such as the Global Disinformation Index and for-profit censorship businesses such as NewsGuard produce widely used censorship tools and blacklists to favor left-wing media while working to silence media that fight false narratives.”

As described by Hemingway, censorship tools employed by groups such as GDI and NewsGuard “routinely rate leftwing news outlets, that are no threat to the permanent bureaucracy, higher than those that challenge prevailing orthodoxies.” These deceptively crafted lists are subsequently used by companies to “boycott some publications and reward others with advertising,” she explained.

“The Washington Post and New York Times routinely receive the highest marks. Those publications won Pulitzers for their role in the Russia collusion hoax, and we have some participants in that hoax here on this subcommittee,” Hemingway said. “My publication, The Federalist, exposed that hoax through dogged reporting and investigation, as we did with the media’s vicious lies against Justice Brett Kavanaugh. We exposed much of the censorship industrial complex, too, even suing the State Department after discovering its role in promoting and marketing censorship tools that are being used against us even as we sit here today.”

As noted by Hemingway, The Federalist is no stranger to being a target of the expansive censorship-industrial complex.

During the summer of 2020, for example, the left-wing Center for Countering Digital Hate colluded with NBC News to try and strip The Federalist of its Google ad revenue. As The Federalist’s Jordan Boyd reported, “NBC News reported that Google banned The Federalist due to a shoddy report from the network’s ‘verification unit,’ and the Center for Countering Digital Hate took issue with The Federalist’s reporting about the race-motivated rioting and violence that plagued the nation during the summer of rage.”

Hemingway also cited a 2023 report by the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government “documenting how Stanford University colluded with two governmental entities to pressure social media companies into censoring true information, jokes, satire, political reporting, and analysis, all of which they claimed was ‘disinformation.’” The Federalist editor-in-chief noted how she and Federalist CEO Sean Davis were targeted by this censorship operation.

“One of the censored items was a story about a TV appearance in which I said of the media, ‘They lie, they lie, they lie, and then they lie.’ Gallup reported in February that my view is held by 70 percent of Americans, who say they don’t trust corporate media to report news accurately, fairly, or fully,” Hemingway said.

Hemingway concluded her opening statement by noting the difficulties in “facing” the vast censorship-industrial complex, and that while it “would have been easy to fold,” doing so is “exactly what censors want: to make it impossible to report the truth about their lies.”

“They know our voice is so powerful and influential that they can’t accomplish their goals unless they shut us down. They will not succeed,” Hemingway said. “We will never stop. The more they try to shut us down, the harder we’re going to work to stay open, because it’s not about us — it’s about whether we will have a civilization where people are allowed to say and think things tyrants don’t want us to.”


Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Democrats Talk About Illegal Immigrants the Same Way They Used to Talk About Slaves


BY: EVITA DUFFY-ALFONSO | JANUARY 13, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/01/13/democrats-talk-about-illegal-immigrants-the-same-way-they-used-to-talk-about-slaves/

Nadler Democrats immigrations

“We need immigrants in this country,” Democratic Rep. Jerrold Nadler said Thursday during a House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement hearing. “Our vegetables would rot in the ground if they weren’t being picked by many immigrants — many illegal immigrants.” 

“The fact is, the birth rate in this country is way below replacement level,” he continued. Nadler is adamantly anti-life and given that abortion is responsible for the deaths of millions of unborn American children, it’s unlikely that he’s sincerely concerned about the United States’ replacement rates.

Nadler’s remarks recall the Democratic party’s past reasoning for supporting slavery. Federalist Senior Editor Mark Hemingway pointed out that Democrats in 1823 were backing slavery because if there were no slaves, “Who would pick our cotton?” Today, Democrats are making the argument that low-wage working illegal migrants are necessary to pick “our vegetables.”

Another striking comparison is the Democrats’ past support of slave traders and their current aiding of human trafficking at the southern border. As Federalist CEO Sean Davis explained, “Before the Civil War, Democrats bought their slaves from human traffickers who kidnapped them and then shipped them across the Atlantic. In 2023, they use cartels to smuggle illegal immigrants across a border Democrats refuse to close.”

Indeed, human trafficking at our southern border is now a multi-billion dollar business, and Democrats have no plan to stop the abuse. In December alone, over 300,000 illegal immigrants crossed into the United States.

Now, illegal immigration isn’t just a problem for border states but the entire nation. Massive influxes of aliens are now invading places like New York City and Chicago, putting massive strain on city resources. Meanwhile, the fentanyl crisis created by the open southern border is taking countless American lives in all corners of the country — both urban and rural. 

[Read: Border-Jumpers Are Pushing American Kids Out Of School All Across The Country]

This week, citizens were given some hope after the Texas Military Department took over a 2.5-mile long stretch along the Rio Grande River, supposedly to stop illegal immigration in the high-traffic crossing area and keep out federal border officials who “perpetuate illegal immigrant crossings in the park and greater Eagle Pass area.”

However, as my colleague Jordan Boyd explained, the move appears to be nothing more than political theater. “Yet despite the addition of personnel, barriers, gates, concertina wire, and military Humvees’ to the area,” Boyd wrote, Texas Gov. “Abbott has not authorized the Texas National Guard to detain and deport illegal immigrants, who are still being turned over to Border Patrol for processing and, in most cases, release.”

“So, while the move prompted an outcry from the Biden administration and federal border officials who say the state’s interference prevents them from doing their jobs,” she added, “Abbott’s move won’t fundamentally change the dynamic at the border.”

In other words, the border remains open, and the drug and human trafficking crises caused by it rage on. But, according to Nadler, it’s all worth it because the vegetable industry needs people to pick produce for exploitative slave wages.


Evita Duffy-Alfonso is a staff writer to The Federalist and the co-founder of the Chicago Thinker. She loves the Midwest, lumberjack sports, writing, and her family. Follow her on Twitter at @evitaduffy_1 or contact her at evita@thefederalist.com.

Author Evita Duffy-Alfonso profile

EVITA DUFFY-ALFONSO

VISIT ON TWITTER@EVITADUFFY_1

MORE ARTICLES

Sean Davis Op-ed: Was 9/11 The Beginning of the End of the American Empire?


BY: SEAN DAVIS | SEPTEMBER 11, 2023

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/09/11/was-9-11-the-beginning-of-the-end-of-the-american-empire/

rubble from the twin towers on 9/11

Author Sean Davis profile

SEAN DAVIS

VISIT ON TWITTER@SEANMDAV

MORE ARTICLES

Was 9/11 the beginning of the end for America? In the 22 years since the attacks, I’ve begun to worry that the answer to that question is “yes.”

It spawned the worst and most destructive foreign policy in the country’s history. The government response to 9/11 birthed the constitutional abomination that is the modern warrantless surveillance state. The Patriot Act enabled the government to weaponize its vast resources against its own people.

Bush’s failed foreign policy led directly to Obama’s presidency, and indirectly to Biden’s, both of which are responsible for diminishing the U.S. at home and abroad, militarily and economically. After two failed forever wars that wouldn’t have happened without 9/11, our government is now desperately trying to foment a potentially nuclear forever war against Russia.

Meanwhile, all the massive surveillance powers claimed by the U.S. after 9/11 are being ruthlessly deployed against American political enemies of the regime via the most insidious censorship-industrial complex the world has ever seen.

And then there’s the crippling legacy of debt enabled by America’s response to 9/11. Not content to spend trillions on poorly thought-out invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, our leaders spent as thoughtlessly at home, creating insane amounts of new entitlements, while doing nothing to put the country on a sound financial footing.

And where are we today? The ruling political party is criminalizing its opposition and attempting to throw its top political opponent and his supporters in prison, all under the guise of “democracy.”

While the national unity in the days after the towers fell was unfortunately fleeting, the changes to the country, its laws, and its leaders were not. Perhaps there’s no better example of this than watching the man who scoffed during a presidential debate at the notion of America engaging in global “nation-building” suddenly declare that it was America’s mission to spread democracy to the ends of the earth with the “ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.”

It is clear that 9/11 spawned the most destructive foreign policy in modern American history. Instead of simply eliminating the Taliban and the terrorist havens in Afghanistan — an objective that had largely been achieved by the end of 2001 — the U.S. government insisted on grafting Western democracy onto the people of Afghanistan. Without 9/11, there is no 20-year forever war in Afghanistan that ends with China in control of an American airbase and the Taliban in control of tens of billions of dollars of American military equipment and weapons.

Without 9/11, there is also no war in Iraq, which morphed from a mission to eliminate weapons of mass destruction to a war to bring democracy to a hodgepodge of tribes, warring factions, and religious sects throughout the Middle East. Yes, I know the official original rationale was that the war was launched entirely to capture weapons that we now know didn’t exist, but without 9/11, there’s no “axis of evil” speech and resultant march to war to depose Saddam Hussein. In his 2003 State of the Union address on the eve of the Iraq invasion, Bush himself explicitly claimed that Hussein was personally working with al Qaeda, and warned that Hussein might give al Qaeda weapons they could use to attack the United States.

While Bush and Republicans rode the wave of post-9/11 sentiment to political victories in 2002 and 2004, the honeymoon was short-lived. By 2006, the country had largely soured on the war in Iraq amidst increasing casualties with little progress to show for them, paving the way for massive Democrat gains in Congress and a flip of both houses away from Republicans and into Democrat hands. And in the 2008 Democrat political primaries, it was Barack Obama who rode the anti-war wave onto the presidential ballot by defeating Hillary Clinton, who had supported Bush’s efforts in Iraq. A war-weary country that had soured on global military intervention at any cost overwhelmingly voted for the anti-war Obama over the pro-war John McCain.

Without 9/11, there is no war in Iraq, and without the war in Iraq, there’s likely no President Obama, no President Trump (whose opposition to the war in Iraq and America’s hamfisted approach to foreign policy propelled him into the presidency), and certainly no President Biden. When America was caught in the quicksand of Iraq in 2008, Russian President Vladimir Putin annexed the country of Georgia. When America revealed itself to be a paper tiger in Afghanistan after 20 years of failed efforts to turn it into a beacon of Western liberalism, Putin seized Crimea. The seeds of each of those events were sowed on 9/11.

Meanwhile, the Bush administration seized on the emergency created by 9/11 to construct the largest surveillance state in world history. Almost overnight, the Patriot Act was passed, the Department of Homeland Security was created, and warrantless wiretaps were authorized, and it didn’t take long before each of those tools was weaponized against the American people. At the time, only a handful of people voted against those laws, and they were roundly mocked for their opposition (Rep. Barbara Lee was the sole vote in the House against the Afghanistan war, while Sen. Russ Feingold was the lone vote against the Patriot Act in the Senate). The U.S. government ended up using tools that were intended to be used against foreign terrorists to instead spy on the political campaign of Donald Trump. Tools that were supposed to be used to monitor terrorist chatter overseas are right now being used to justify censorship of American citizens. And all of it is being done based on laws and institutions that were created in the wake of 9/11.

Finally, at no point did America’s representatives in Washington consider actually paying for the trillions and trillions of dollars that would be used to prosecute their failed wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. No, those costs were financed by debt that will eventually have to be repaid by the grandchildren of those who authorized it. On top of that, Congress and the president heaped new entitlement on top of new entitlement, year after year. After the growth of the national debt finally began to slow in the 1990s following the end of the Cold War, the national debt nearly doubled during George W. Bush’s presidency, doubled again during Obama’s tenure, and will double again between 2016 and 2026 according to Office of Management and Budget projections. A country with this kind of debt growth is a country that is all but begging for hyperinflation and currency devaluation. It’s not a question of if, but when.

In hindsight, America’s response to 9/11 crippled the country. It birthed a disastrous foreign policy ideology that is still wreaking havoc on our own country, as well as the rest of the world. It spawned a surveillance state that threatens to rip the fabric of the country in two. It led to monstrous debt growth that will destroy the country financially from within if the trends are not quickly reversed.

We generally remember 9/11 as the day that the towers came down. I now worry that future historians will look back on it as the day that America started to fall.


Sean Davis is CEO and co-founder of The Federalist. He previously worked as an economic policy adviser to Gov. Rick Perry, as CFO of Daily Caller, and as chief investigator for Sen. Tom Coburn. He was named by The Hill as one of the top congressional staffers under the age of 35 for his role in spearheading the enactment of the law that created USASpending.gov. Sean received a BBA in finance from Texas Tech University and an MBA in finance and entrepreneurial management from the Wharton School. He can be reached via e-mail at sean@thefederalist.com.

Study: Free Speech On Twitter Worse Under Elon Musk 


BY: EVITA DUFFY-ALFONSO | MARCH 30, 2023

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/03/30/study-free-speech-on-twitter-worse-under-elon-musk/

Study: Free Speech On Twitter Worse Under Elon Musk 
A new study from the Media Research Center found Twitter is more oppressive since Elon Musk acquired the platform.

Author Evita Duffy-Alfonso profile

EVITA DUFFY-ALFONSO

VISIT ON TWITTER@EVITADUFFY_1

MORE ARTICLES

Following the Twitter censorship of Federalist CEO Sean Davis, several journalists, and a sitting member of Congress who all reported on the “Trans Day Of Vengeance” after the Nashville Shooting, the Media Research Center (MRC) published a shocking study about “free speech” on Twitter. Despite many claims to the contrary, the MRC found the company has become more oppressive since Elon Musk acquired the platform.  

According to data from the MRC’s Free Speech America’s CensorTrack.org database, there have been 293 cases of documented censorship since Musk took over from Nov. 4, 2022, through Mar. 4, 2023. This is 67 more cases than the 226 instances reported by CensorTrack.org from pre-Musk Twitter during the same time last year. 

The Media Research Center also found Twitter’s methods of censorship recently became more severe. “In 245 of the 293 (84%) documented cases of censorship on CensorTrack.org, Twitter locked users’ accounts, and in nearly all cases users were required to delete the content to regain access to their accounts,” reports the MRC. “Under the old Twitter regime, by contrast, only 136 of the 226 (60%) documented cases of censorship consisted of locked accounts.”

An astounding 62 percent of the censorship cases under Musk’s leadership involved tweets critical of transgenderism. “At least 182 of the 293 (62%) documented cases of censorship recorded in the CensorTrack.org database for Twitter under Musk involved users being censored for speech critical of the left’s woke ‘transgender’ narrative,” writes the MRC.

On Tuesday, Federalist CEO Sean Davis, other journalists, and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene were locked out of Twitter for reporting on the “Trans Day Of Vengeance” following the deaths of three children and three staff members at a Christian school in Tennessee at the hands of a transgender shooter.

Twitter claimed Davis’ objectively true tweet reporting on the panned “Trans Day Of Vengeance” violated the app’s rules “against violent speech.” Not only did Twitter lock Davis out of his account, but it also defamed him by falsely claiming he had “threatened, incited, glorified, or expressed a desire for violence.” “Twitter has a right to ban me for whatever reason it wants, but it doesn’t have a right to viciously lie about me,” Davis wrote, addressing the ban. 

Davis has also been subjected to Twitter’s insidious shadow banning that carried over from the platform’s previous regime. And Federalist Senior Editor John Davidson has been locked out of his account for a full year because he tweeted the biological fact that Rachel Levine, the Biden administration’s transgender assistant secretary for health, is a man. Both Davis and Davidson have made appeals since Musk purchased the company over, but both remain censored on Twitter.

A year ago, Musk claimed he saw Twitter as the “de facto town square” and that “failing to adhere to free speech principles fundamentally undermines democracy.” Unfortunately, as the anecdotal evidence and data from MRC show, Musk’s “free speech absolutist” Twitter rebrand has failed to live up to the hype.

“No amount of lofty rhetoric or grandiose plans from Musk about his love of free speech and facts can compete with the cold, hard reality that the service he owns doesn’t just oppose free speech; Twitter detests it,” wrote Davis. 


Evita Duffy-Alfonso is a staff writer to The Federalist and the co-founder of the Chicago Thinker. She loves the Midwest, lumberjack sports, writing, and her family. Follow her on Twitter at @evitaduffy_1 or contact her at evita@thefederalist.com.

Corporate Media Can Stomp and Cry All It Wants, Its Special Twitter Privileges Are Ending


BY: EVITA DUFFY-ALFONSO | DECEMBER 16, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/12/16/corporate-media-can-stomp-and-cry-all-it-wants-its-special-twitter-privileges-are-ending/

Corporate media ‘journalists’ are crying like children because they no longer get special permission to dox their political enemies.

Author Evita Duffy-Alfonso profile

EVITA DUFFY-ALFONSO

VISIT ON TWITTER@EVITADUFFY_1

MORE ARTICLES

Before Elon Musk bought Twitter, corporate journalists freely persecuted their political enemies by posting their identities and locations to enable in-person harassment, but not anymore. This week, Musk decided he’s no longer allowing anyone, including journalists, to jeopardize people’s safety via Twitter, and he began temporarily suspending the accounts of offending members of the press. 

“Everyone’s going to be treated the same. You’re not special because you’re a journalist,” Musk wrote in a Twitter post.

The crackdown on doxxing is personal for Twitter’s CEO. On Wednesday, Musk reported that his 2-year-old son named “X” was followed by a “crazy stalker” who had mistaken X for Musk. According to Musk, the stalker blocked the car driving his son and “climbed onto the hood.” The incident motivated Musk to suspend several high-profile journalists guilty of doxxing. This caused the corporate media to fly into hysterics. “Elon Musk censors the press,” said one CNN headline.” “[U]nprecedented,” stated the flabbergasted Axios. “Twitter suspends journalists who wrote about owner Elon Musk,” alleged The Associated Press. “Musk has begun banning journalists who have criticized him on Twitter,” whined Washington Post TikTok reporter Taylor Lorenz.

All this outrage is performative. Firstly, Musk made it clear why the journalists are suspended, and it’s not because they “criticized” him, as Lorenz said. “Criticizing me all day long is totally fine, but doxxing my real-time location and endangering my family is not,” wrote Musk.

Secondly, the propaganda press doesn’t care about freedom of the press or free speech. They cheer on and instigate the de-platforming of competing journalists and news organizations. The only thing the media cares about is losing its monopoly on digital discourse and the special treatment it received from pre-Musk Twitter staff. 

Before Musk, the corporate media enjoyed gross privileges awarded to them by their ideological allies at Twitter. When Lorenz outed the identity of the formerly anonymous woman who runs the “Libs of TikTok” Twitter account, Lorenz was never disciplined. As the “The Twitter Files” reveal, if Twitter staff did try to sanction left-wing users for violating Twitter rules, senior executives at the company would swoop in behind the scenes and protect them. 

Meanwhile, countless conservative journalists were subject to random suspensions, locked accounts, and bans for harassment-free thought crimes. The Federalist’s Senior Editor John Davidson continues to be locked out of his Twitter account because in March he tweeted the truth: Rachel Levine, the U.S. assistant secretary for health, is a man. Levine, a transgender male, is indeed a man and no amount of makeup or surgery will change that, yet Twitter penalized Davidson for promoting “hate speech.” It still is penalizing him.

The Federalist’s CEO and co-founder Sean Davis was also targeted by pre-Musk Twitter and his account is still subject to a shadowban today. That means Davis’s posts are reduced in their ability to reach people. The reason for the shadowban remains unclear, but it’s fair to assume the censorship was politically motivated. The “Twitter Files” revealed how pre-Musk Twitter used shadowbanning to punish ideological dissenters against Twitter’s own terms of use. 

Former President Donald Trump was perhaps Twitter’s most high-profile ban. While he was still in office, Twitter nuked Trump’s account. The “Twitter Files” show Twitter moderators admitted at the time of his banning that Trump had not violated any terms of service. The “Twitter Files” also revealed that the very real Hunter Biden laptop story was banished from the app even though it didn’t violate any of Twitter’s stated rules, either.   

Unlike conservatives who were political targets of Twitter’s pre-Musk censorship regime, journalists suspended for doxxing are instigating real, physical harm. People outed and targeted by corporate media for expressing conservative views have been fired, had their businesses harassed and ruined, and been targeted for violence. Unlike the shadowbanning of Davis, the banishment of Trump, and the nuking of the Hunter Biden laptop story, doxxing journalists know exactly what Twitter rule they violated. Musk told them in plain words.

The leftist media complex is in a frenzy because it lost some privileges after Elon took over. “Handled,” one Twitter employee wrote to a “connected actor” who requested the deletion of disliked tweets, according to the “Twitter Files.”

That kind of special treatment is over. Twitter’s “rules for thee, but not for me” policy is gone, and the propaganda press is going to have to get used to it.


Evita Duffy is a staff writer to The Federalist and the co-founder of the Chicago Thinker. She loves the Midwest, lumberjack sports, writing, and her family. Follow her on Twitter at @evitaduffy_1 or contact her at evita@thefederalist.com.

Tag Cloud