Rachel Alexander knows a good right-wing narrative when she sees one — however dishonest — so she spent her Feb. 12 WorldNetDaily column glomming onto the Media Research Center-peddled idea that addressing online hate and lies is “censorship”:
Unelected bureaucrats in the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and associated Big Brother federal agencies recently began expanding their censorship to the judiciary. The CIA and Department of Justice teamed up under the pretense of stopping “disinformation” about fraudulent elections and other speech from the right, claiming it extended into the legal system, but so far it’s been used to stamp out concerns of election illegalities by attorneys and plaintiffs. By prohibiting these lawsuits, the Democrats will be able to ensure that Donald Trump and future Republicans do not become president.
The first disinformation task force within the legal system was launched in 2019 at the Arizona Supreme Court. It was full of progressives like Frederic Bellamy, an attorney who said Sean Hannity is disinformation. The task force got its information from the National Center for State Courts, which declared that one of the most “dangerous political themes” is “The justice system ignores voting irregularities and fraud allowing elections to be stolen from certain candidates.”
In fact, Hannity is indisputably a prime source of disinformation.
Alexander then attacked “Former CIA official Susan Spaulding” for her alleged “busybody work” in exposing and countering disinformation, making sure to invoke the Soros boogeyman by noting that she once worked for an organization “funded by George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.” She then complained about a report Spaulding co-wrote:
The report “Beyond the Ballot,” which Spaulding co-authored, encourages the judiciary to continue the exact type of government meddling exposed in the Twitter files. It urged, “There is an immediate need to expand both the content and the reach of threat awareness among practitioners in the justice system so they are cognizant of the threat and can be ready to respond.” It said courts “should establish lines of communication with social media platforms and appropriate federal entities to maintain awareness of the threat.”
The report treats the viewpoints of “right-wing pundits'” as disinformation, criticizing their accusation that “the U.S. justice system is a tool of the ‘deep state.'” It said disinformation must be stamped out, such as, “The democracy is run by the social elites, and the justice system is a pawn used to advance the political goals of these elites.”
Alexander failed to mention the fact that the report was focused on Kremlin influence on American politics, and that it specifically pointed out that the idea that “the U.S. justice system is a tool of the ‘deep state'” is “perhaps the most salient frame that Russia reinforces” and that this “catch-all frame that was widely accepted by many right-wing pundits.”
She then repeated her longtime complaint that attorneys are facing consequences for spreading lies about election fraud:
Courts around the country are gradually adopting this approach of stamping out concerns about election illegalities, sanctioning election attorneys who litigate the issues. State bars, which are usually formed as private entities contracted under the authority of state supreme courts, are disbarring election attorneys for bringing lawsuits challenging the illegal activities.
The International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) issued a paper urging strong discipline against attorneys who bring election lawsuits, holding up as an example a Brazilian court’s treatment of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro for his lawsuits alleging election fraud. That court barred Bolsonaro from running for office for eight years as punishment. IFES praised proactive moves, “[M]any countries have passed legislation imposing various restrictions on freedom of speech around elections.” IFES praised courts for disciplining attorneys who brought “frivolous” lawsuits alleging election wrongdoing like Rudy Giuliani.
While the House committee report rightfully found that “CISA must be reined in,” it must go further and stop the weaponization of the judiciary to stop efforts against illegal election activity. The committee should hold hearings on these abuses, including state bars targeting election attorneys. Otherwise the election fraud will ensure there are no more Republican presidents.
Is Alexander saying that the only way Republicans can win elections is by making false accusations of election fraud? Sure seems like it. And she offered no justification for leaving lies and hate unchallenged and uncorrected.