buffer from criticism. they acted like they wereial me removed from the process and that social media companieso wncould make their own decisions on how to best moderate content . media platforms makede independent choices aboupendent their information. they present course. it s us upo thesp to these comps to make their own decision about the content on their platform. eir platfoand to ensure contents their own standards and policies. twitter, as you know, is a private company and theyd will make their own decisionthe yeah, right. plausibleah,e deniability is thn name of the game. just send fauci on an endless press tour claiming the science is settled and opposing viewpoints aren t just wrong,ut but very dangerous that way. joe biden gets to keep his hands clean. it seems like the people who spread the disinformation, a very energetic and seemedve gt to have nothing else to do but o do that. so we ve got to be out there,bla scientists and the general public and thosend wh
that s just the problem.. they have politicized and weaponized the debate here. there thes jim baker was the se jim baker who was behind the russian collusion hoax. whe he was the same jim baker their who was at twitter when they when they went out ofthei their way to censor the new york post over their accuratef reporting on biden s laptop. and now we see that there s jim baker pops up again to try u to censor the president of the united states , overcover purely jim baker proves this is just purely politics. what they rey re doing with this censorship. doctor , again,. your personal experience as a qualified medicaoctor agl doctof sharing a bits of information, it doesn t seem like you r e taking an extreme position.ng weu re just saying some things y were common sense from your perspective. yeah, and i think i mean, ic the basic principles of public health was violated during t these last three years. and i thin pk it s the biggestal public health scorthe ever. and for exam