The Harris/Walz campaign team criticized Elon Musk’s role in the 2024 presidential election while he hosted an “X Spaces” show with Donald Trump on Monday.
“It’s not enough that Musk has promised to donate millions of dollars to help Trump’s re-election,” the Harris-Walz campaign wrote. “He is using his purchased platform – one of the largest social media sites in the world – to spread Trump’s confused and hateful agenda to millions of users.”
In other words, Kamala Harris’ team is accusing a prominent tech executive of abusing his power to influence the election. She’d better not listen to that.
Other than Joe Biden, no one in Washington can thank Big Tech for her current position more than Harris. Social media companies helped Biden/Harris win the White House in 2020. This is not a right-wing conspiracy theory, as CNN would have you believe.
Here’s a quick summary of how big tech companies rigged the election four years ago:
One in six Biden voters say they would have changed their vote if they had known about the New York Post’s revelation about Hunter Biden’s corrupt international dealings. However, Twitter 1.0 and Facebook suppressed the report, falsely declaring the article “Russian disinformation.”
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has since admitted that Facebook kept the report under wraps on behalf of the FBI, which had warned about Russian propaganda weeks earlier.
“We just thought, ‘Hey, look, if the FBI, which I still consider a legitimate institution in this country, is a very professional law enforcement agency, they come to us and tell us we need to be on guard against something, then I want to take that seriously,'” Zuckerberg said in an interview with Joe Rogan in August 2022.
The FBI is not the only government agency that exerts its power through social media.
Last November, the House Judiciary Committee released a 103-page interim report detailing the extent to which government agencies pressured technology companies ahead of the 2020 presidential election to dictate what information could be posted on social media.
The discovery uncovered “hundreds” of reports showing how the Department of Homeland Security, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the State Department and Stanford University helped create a secret “disinformation” group that called on social media companies to “censor true information, jokes and political opinions.”
Platforms like Facebook and Twitter caved in. The pressure campaign disproportionately resulted in information deemed unfavorable to Democrats being banned from the platforms.
And then there is Google, the editor-in-chief of the World Wide Web.
In May, Google confirmed the authenticity of nearly 2,500 leaked internal documents that allegedly belonged to the service. The previously questioned documents describe in detail how Google assigns “authority scores” to websites on topics such as the 2020 election (IsElectionAuthority) and Covid-19 (IsCovidLocalAuthority).
Based on authority ratings, “left-leaning media” accounts for 63 percent of articles on Google News, according to a recent analysis by AllSides. “Right-leaning sources” account for just 6 percent of articles.
Coincidence?
Barely.
This brings us to psychologist Dr. Robert Epstein, whom the media has tried to discredit over the past decade despite his accuracy.
In 2019, Dr. Epstein testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that “distorted search results generated by Google’s search algorithm in 2016” “shifted at least 2.6 million votes to Hillary Clinton.”
Epstein took a more proactive approach to investigating how Google acted in the election that followed. In 2020, he published a study in which he found evidence that Google’s search results showed a “strong bias in favor of Democrats” in the weeks and months leading up to the election.
“We identified a period of several days where the vote reminder on the Google homepage was only sent to liberals,” Epstein told Fox News at the time. “None of our conservative field staff received the vote reminder.”
“The bias was shown to virtually every demographic. That includes conservatives. Conservatives received a stronger liberal bias in their search results than liberals.”
Epstein concluded that Google had shifted “at least six million votes in favor” of Joe Biden. “That’s the bare minimum,” he warned.
Biden won the popular vote by about seven million votes. A narrow margin of votes – say a gap of about one million votes – now almost always indicates a Republican victory.
Call it election interference, technology bias, or government pressure on private companies, big tech companies helped Joe Biden win the presidential election four years ago.
This means that Kamala Harris would have had to win the Democratic primary to be nominated as a candidate in 2024. She tried to do that in 2020. However, her support was so low that she had to drop out of the race before Iowa.
Without the help of Facebook, Google and Twitter 1.0, Harris would not be the likely Democratic nominee. Yet here she is lamenting that Elon Musk and X are supporting Trump in his campaign efforts.
And whatever advantage X gives Trump—Musk’s endorsement and an open platform that welcomes all viewpoints—Harris still has a critical advantage in getting messages across.
With the exception of X, all other major social media platforms have shown a Democrat-friendly stance.
In terms of user numbers, X also lags far behind Facebook, Google, YouTube, TikTok, Snapchat, and Instagram. (See eMarketer’s chart above.)
Harris also has the established media firmly in her pocket. The media’s infatuation with her is no less than her previous love affair with Barack Obama and George Floyd.
The press has glossed over Harris’ many mistakes and shortcomings, portraying her as strong, battle-hardened and “cheerful” – which she is not.
Sure, Elon Musk and X have wrested the Democrats’ monopoly on social and commercial media. But both industries remain loyal assets of the Harris campaign – ready to promote their Marxist, “America Second” agenda to millions of Americans.
Listen to Bobby Burack on Fox News’ “Will Cain Show.”
