EXCLUSIVE: The National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) Worked with the UN, Twitter, State Govts and Non-profits to Prevent Free Speech and Impact the 2020 US Election

 

The National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) held meetings with the UN since 2018, now we see that they also worked with Twitter in 2020 to prevent free speech.

We reported again yesterday the story about how one American, Dr. Shiva Ayyarurai, discovered that Twitter has built a special portal offered to certain governmental entities so that government officials can flag and delete content they dislike for any reason, as part of what they call “Twitter Partner Status.”

Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, the man who invented email, ran for US Senate in Massachusetts as a Republican and made allegations of voter fraud on Twitter. These tweets were then deleted by the far-left tech giant.  Later it was discovered that they were deleted at the direction of government employees of the Massachusetts Secretary of State’s office. 

Discovering this, Dr. Ayyadurai filed a federal lawsuit by himself, alleging that his federal civil rights were violated when the government silenced his political speech in order to affect an election.

Legal observers note, the judge is signaling that Twitter’s days of claiming it is a private company so as to avoid it’s clear oppression of conservative speech, banning scores of conservative journalists, and promotion of liberal views, may be coming to a close end: 

Manhattan Cmty. Access Corp. v. Halleck, 139 S. Ct. 1921, 1928 (2019)

“A private entity can qualify as a state actor in a few limited circumstances-including, for example, … when the government compels the private entity to take a particular action…”

Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991, 1004 (1982)

“a State normally can be held responsible for a private decision only when it has exercised coercive power or has provided such significant encouragement, either overt or covert, that the choice must in law be deemed to be that of the State”

This case could spell the end of CDA 230.

CDA 230 is the provision of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 that gives internet and social media companies legal immunity from lawsuits due to the content they publish. 

This provision in law gives companies like Facebook and Twitter a way to dismiss lawsuits, but it also gives them the ability to act with impunity so that their actions cannot be legally challenged. These companies have, according to their detractors, abused this immunity by suppressing dissident, and specifically conservative, views, viewpoints and journalism.

Because Dr. Ayyadurai did not argue about Twitter’s “Terms of Service” everything will instead hinge on the degree of interaction between Twitter and the state government of Massachusetts. 

What we noticed today is that Dr. Shiva’s lawsuit also includes the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED):

We’ve reported on the NASED previously.  This group of election directors in the US as well as the group of Secretaries of State worked with the UN before the 2020 election:

These non-profits received donations from voting machine companies, ballot printing companies, Zuckerberg’s non-profit as well as a Hillary-related non-profit in 2020. 

And now we know they were working with Twitter to prevent free speech in the US.

Who ultimately was behind preventing Americans’ free speech using Big Tech and government bodies in the election?  Was it the UN, Soros, the Democrat Party, or these and other entities.   The connections and corruption between Big Tech, nonprofits, and government bodies is now a well-oiled anti-American machine.