Earlier today, Twitter suspended the account of Jared Beck, an attorney representing the plaintiffs in the DNC Fraud Lawsuit. Disobedient Media has consistently covered the ongoing litigation of the suit, which has resulted in questions regarding a number of deaths, bizarre phone calls, and other unusual occurrences.
The historical significance of the Beck’s suit against the DNC and former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz cannot be overstated, as it confronts the heart of the actual election-rigging from which the entire Russiagate scandal was constructed to deflect. Despite this – or because of it – the lawsuit has gained remarkably sparse corporate media coverage.
The suit has forced the DNC’s counsel to admit a number of shocking stances, including statements suggesting that the party had every right to choose candidates in back rooms, and even that election-rigging is protected by the first amendment. DNC counsel had the gall to argue:
“… To recognize any of the causes of action that Plaintiffs allege based on their animating theory would run directly contrary to long-standing Supreme Court precedent recognizing the central and critical First Amendment rights enjoyed by political parties, especially when it comes to selecting the party’s nominee for public office.”
Wasserman-Schultz, we remind our readers, has been a central figure across multiple election integrity and corruption scandals, including the still-unprosecuted Awan scandal, the cheating of Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic Primary, alleged voice-modulated calls left at the offices of the Becks, which included the phrase “Okey-dokey,” likely involvement in the overt rigging of the 2018 midterm race for Florida’s 23rd district, and more. Wasserman-Schultz also publicly embraced a Floridian democrat who openly offered to shoot Julian Assange and Edward Snowden.
One might forgive the Becks for venting their stress and anger on social media, when facing off with such a shamelessly corrupt individual and party, within a judicial system that appears doomed to fail its obligations to uphold the rule of law.
At the time of writing, the specific Tweet(s) which resulted in Beck’s suspension are unknown. Beck has proven himself a fierce critic of the establishment status-quo on Twitter, where in recent days he has openly mocked the presidential bid of Kamala Harris. He has been far from the only voice to raise concerns regarding Harris’s candidacy.
Disobedient Media has repeatedly covered mounting censorship across Twitter and other social media platforms.
While many may strongly disagree with some or all of Beck’s social media statements, it must be remembered that Beck represents not only the plaintiffs in a historic lawsuit, but a unique and unvarnished anti-establishment voice. One can disagree with someone on social media without advocating for their voice to be removed from a conversation entirely.