Trump campaign lawyers James R. Troupis (left), Jesse Binnall (center) and former Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Director Chris Krebs (right) testify at a Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs hearing on Dec. 16, 2020. (center) and former Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Director Chris Krebs (right) testify under oath at a Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs hearing to examine allegations of election irregularities in 2020.
Jesse Binnall, a lawyer for President Trump’s campaign, said YouTube removed his opening statement about election fraud from a Senate homeland security hearing.
Binnall disclosed on Twitter late Saturday night (Dec. 19), “YouTube decided to take my opening statement in the federal (Senate), which were statements I made under oath based on corroborating evidence, and (YouTube felt) it was too dangerous for you to watch, and to this day, they removed it. “
“Our evidence has never been refuted, it has just been ignored. Why is Google so afraid of the truth?” Binal questioned at the end of the tweet.
YouTube announced earlier this month that starting Dec. 9, the platform will block and remove content that contains “allegations of widespread fraud or wrongly rewritten results of the historic U.S. presidential election. The company said this is because the Dec. 8 presidential election “safe harbor” deadline has passed and “enough states have already certified their election results.
YouTube wrote, “We are removing videos that claim presidential candidates won the election due to widespread software glitches or vote counting errors. We will begin enforcing this policy today and will ramp it up in the coming weeks, and as always, news reports and commentary on these issues can stay on our site if there is sufficient educational, documentary, scientific or artistic background.”
The Google-owned company did not elaborate on the background note. And the announcement drew harsh condemnation from conservatives and free speech advocates, who pointed out that YouTube’s decision was tantamount to censorship of dissenting views.
As of Dec. 20, there are still outstanding legal challenges to this year’s presidential election, in addition to two separate groups of electors each voting for their own candidate in each of the six swing states and New Mexico at the Dec. 14 Electoral College meeting, all of which could change the outcome of the election.
At the hearing, Binal, who filed the lawsuit in Nevada on behalf of Trump, said the Silver State election was riddled with fraud.
“The voices of thousands of Nevada voters were muted by election fraud and invalid ballots,” he told senators at the hearing.On Aug. 3, 2020, after a rushed special session, Nevada lawmakers made drastic changes to the state’s election laws, passing a bill called AB4.” The bill relaxes restrictions on mail-in ballots under state law.
When they tried to seek an audit of voting machines or ballots, Binal said, they were denied by state election officials the ability to conduct forensic reviews of voting machines or see if they were connected to the Internet, and “we weren’t allowed near the machines, we weren’t allowed to conduct forensic audits.”
“We’ve been denied (transparency) at every turn in Nevada.” Binal added that a Nevada official “locked himself in his office” and would not open the door when Trump’s lawyers tried to serve him with a subpoena.
Recent Comments