Mark Zuckerberg's False Apology

Zuckerberg's actions over the years speak far louder than his words

Mark Zuckerberg made some startling admissions in his recent “mea culpa” letter to Congress. He admitted that the Biden-Harris Administration "pressured" Facebook to censor stories on the origin of Covid.  He admitted that the FBI pressured Facebook to censor the Hunter Laptop story. And he admitted that Facebook did what the government asked him to - censor American citizens.

Zuckerberg also (sort of) addressed his personal financial contributions during the 2020 election. His letter gave the appearance of a public apology - he appeared almost contrite for his actions in the 2020 election and the Covid Pandemic, but is Zuckerberg really sorry? Or is he simply worried because he got caught? A closer look at the involvement of Zuckerberg & Facebook with the DNC over the years may answer that question.

A pattern of close collaboration between Zuckerberg/Facebook and the DNC goes back to at least 2012 — when Facebook shared their user data with the Obama campaign.

Obama’s Election Team was given full access to Facebook’s data in 2012. Access that was not - and would not have been granted to Conservatives.

As a result, any time people used Facebook’s log-in button to sign on to the campaign’s website, Obama’s data scientists were able to access their profile as well as their friends’ information. That allowed them to chart the closeness of people’s relationships and make estimates about which people would be most likely to influence other people in their network to vote.

Carol Davidsen, who was director of data integration and media analytics for the Obama Campaign, was surprisingly clear about what happened. “We ingested the entire U.S. social graph,” Davidsen said in an interview. “We would ask permission to basically scrape your profile, and also scrape your friends, basically anything that was available to scrape. We scraped it all.”

Davidson also highlighted the favoritism Facebook gave to Obama’s campaign, noting that Facebook “came to office in the days following election recruiting & were very candid that they allowed us to do things they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side.”

Which raises an important question. If Facebook gave the Obama Campaign access to valuable data worth millions of dollars to bolster Obama’s chances of winning the election, why wasn’t this access counted as in-kind political contributions by the Obama Campaign?

We’ve all heard how Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg infamously privatized elements of the 2020 presidential election when he sent nearly half-a-billion dollars to local election boards in key states to turn out likely Democratic voters.

To put that amount into perspective, Zuckerberg alone spent almost as much money funding government election offices as the entire federal government spent on the 2020 election.

Zuckerberg’s payments were supposedly made to fill so-called funding gaps from the federal government but the reality is that the Zuckerbucks – as they have come to be known – were distributed on a highly partisan basis with the aim of electing Biden and other Democrats.

Zuckerberg claimed in his recent letter that his efforts were non-partisan, but this is simply not true.

Zuckerberg essentially mounted a private takeover of government election offices. And it affected all of the key states that helped Biden “win” the election. In Wisconsin, the Zuckerbucks payments were later found to have violated bribery laws. A study also found that without those payments, Trump would have prevailed in Wisconsin.

Facebook later confirmed that it also provided the Biden White House with censorship assistance routinely on a variety of crucial issues.

Zuckerberg also admitted in his letter that Facebook censored the Hunter laptop story at the request of the FBI - and this censorship was done at a crucial time during the 2020 election cycle.

But this wasn't Zuckerberg's first admission of censoring the Hunter Laptop Story. During a now-infamous interview with Joe Rogan, Zuckerberg casually admitted that the FBI approached Facebook—just before the New York Post broke its story on the Hunter laptop—warning of a pending dump of Russian disinformation.

Bear in mind that the New York Post story broke in October 2020. The FBI had physical possession of the laptop since at least December 2019 — almost a full 11 months earlier — and they had likely seen the device’s data several months before that when they were contacted in July 2019 by the computer shop that first had the laptop.

The FBI knew for a fact the laptop was real - and of course, Hunter's laptop has been repeatedly verified.

Facebook Communications Director Andy Stone famously stated that "I will intentionally not link to the New York Post, I want be clear that this story is eligible to be fact checked by Facebook's third-party fact checking partners. In the meantime, we are reducing its distribution on our platform."

Stone further stated that "This is part of our standard process to reduce the spread of misinformation. We temporarily reduce distribution pending fact-checker review." Oddly enough, that fact-checking never came - but known purveyors of DNC-friendly misinformation like Rachel Maddow were actively promoted by Facebook.

Facebook’s censorship actions are actually worse than they’ve been portrayed because Facebook almost certainly knew the Hunter Laptop story was accurate in real time.

In September 2020 there was a meeting organized by the Aspen Digital Hack-and-Dump Working Group. Twitter's Yoel Roth was there. As were reporters from the New York Times and the Washington Post. Along with senior executives from Facebook.

The focus of that group's meeting? The potential leaks surrounding Hunter Biden and his laptop.

The exercise included a highly detailed sequence of events that were predicted to unfold when details of Hunter’s laptop were released. Their wargame covered day one of the release through day eleven — which just so happened to coincide with the second presidential debate.

Keep in mind that all of this took place in September 2020 – BEFORE the Post story on Hunter’s laptop came out on October 14th. And again, executives from Facebook were at the September meetings and appear to have been fully apprised.

But Zuckerberg’s efforts didn’t stop there. In his new letter, Zuckerberg also admitted to "succumbing" to pressure from the Biden Administration on stories on Covid-19.

Zuckerberg now claims that he believes the government pressure was "wrong" and he says he wished he'd been more outspoken about it, But is that really true? As it turns out, Zuckerberg appears to be less of a victim and more of an active participant.

On March 15, 2020, Zuckerberg emailed NIH Director Anthony Fauci, offering to get Fauci’s “message out” and to partner with Fauci on establishing a “Coronavirus Information Hub” on Facebook. Fauci responded to Zuckerberg, saying that the proposal sounded “terrific.”

Fauci also endorsed another of Zuckerberg’s ideas, the specifics of which are unknown since that portion of his email is redacted. Fauci put Zuckerberg in touch with his own director of communications, saying that she would provide Zuckerberg with a “U.S. Government point of contact.”

A few weeks later, in April 2020, Facebook began to monitor and censor COVID-19-related content on its website. Crucially, instead of mandating the removal of objectively false claims, Facebook’s policy mandated the specific removal of claims that didn’t correspond with government recommendations.

In February 2021, the Biden administration admitted that it was engaging directly with social media companies, including Facebook, to remove anything that it deemed to be “misinformation.”

“We are talking to them … so they understand the importance of misinformation and disinformation and how they can get rid of it quickly,” a source within the Biden administration told Reuters.

The source also noted that the effort was designed to ensure that misinformation “does not start trending on such platforms and become a broader movement.”

Facebook subsequently confirmed that it was offering the White House “any assistance [the company could] provide.” By their own admission, Facebook was coordinating closely - and willingly - with government officials to silence opposing views on COVID-19, thereby undermining the constitutionally guaranteed free speech rights of American citizens.

The Obama Campaign admitted that Facebook "allowed us to do things they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side.”

We know that Zuckerberg effectively privatized elements of the 2020 presidential election when he sent nearly half-a-billion dollars to local election boards in key states to turn out likely Democratic voters.

We know that Zuckerberg censored the Hunter Laptop story - despite Facebook executives having very real warnings from their participation in the Aspen Working Group meetings a full month before that the laptop story was accurate.

We also know that Zuckerberg enthusiastically helped Fauci in the monitoring and censorship of COVID-19-related content on its platform.

Facebook even confirmed that it was offering the White House “any assistance [the company could] provide.”

Based on the foregoing and other evidence, you can decide for yourself if Zuckerberg is actually sorry for his actions. Or if he's just sorry that he got exposed.