You're a funny guy. Your mirth here is palpable.

"You Can't Handle the Truth" Full Scene | A Few Good Men :)

The revolutionary speech from V for Vendetta is probably a better fit for this thread.

881 page pdf:
"THE CENSORSHIP-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX: HOW TOP BIDEN WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS COERCED BIG TECH TO CENSOR AMERICANS, TRUE INFORMATION, AND CRITICS OF THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION"
https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/ev...t_Appendix.pdf

^ They held liars to account. That's what that report says.

Speaking of fabrications, tell me upon what page the word liars appears?

Stopping people from disseminating lethal misinformation is not censorship.

Why did you not link to the Fox News article that this "source" is a literally a copy of? Is it because you thought the .gov domain and stylesheet would give it more credibility?

https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1989/10/31

Browsing 101, read a link before you click on it. The words media and maga not enough clue for you or are you one of those who click on a link and wonder how they ended up on a porn site, lol.
For your edification or perhaps, education, "in-the-news" is a repository for articles by several right-leaning news organizations.
By the way, the Dem .gov dis-information domain is here: https://democraticleader.house.gov/media/press-releases
There, class over.

https://judiciary.house.gov -- media -- in-the-news -- alarming-surveillance-feds-asked-banks-search-private-transactions-terms-maga

I assume from your non answer that I am correct about your motives, and you actually were intentionally disguising the source, because you knew that if people saw a Fox News domain in the link, the discussion would be over.

Actual source (which you obviously could have just linked to instead, but chose not to) is here:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ala...rms-maga-trump

There was zero reason for you to choose to link to a “repository” instead of directly to the article. Unless you wanted to deny clicks to Fox News, I guess. But you weren’t trying to do that.

Obviously, btw, there is nothing “alarming” there whatsoever. I am not a Fox News viewer.

I did answer. It's not my fault you don't know how to navigate the internet without getting your pre-concieved viewpoints rebutted. You are the person who alluded that using a .gov domain was a ploy when in fact both parties use such domains to push a narrative. READ a link before clicking on it. :)

No you did not answer. Why did you choose not to link directly to the actual article?

“Read the link before you click it” is not an answer. “Both parties do it” is not an answer. Those are deflections.

Another burst of rudeness will speak for itself.

You are the person who chose, after 4 days of quiescence in this thread, to introduce mock outrage at a supposed ploy. PSA: READ the link!

You’ve had enough chances. Obviously, I am absolutely right, and you did link to a “repository” because you knew that if you linked directly to the article, your argument would collapse.

It's not my fault you ignore SOP for the internet.