Dems Blast AG Testimony in Social Media Hearing as One-Sided

Landry and Schmitt testified before the House Weaponization of the Federal Government Subcommittee on their lawsuit claiming Biden administration collusion with Meta, Twitter and YouTube (see 2210240057 and 2303140027) (docket 3:22-cv-01213) in U.S District Court for Louisiana in Monroe. Landry and Schmitt, a former Missouri attorney general who co-filed the lawsuit, left the hearing after opening remarks. Democrats moved to strike their testimony, with Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., calling the hearing a “mockery.” Offices for Landry and Schmitt didn’t comment on why they left.

The two said they provided evidence of alleged censorship involving former White House Chief Medical Adviser Anthony Fauci and other officials. The Biden administration coerced and collaborated with social media companies to control public narrative, said Schmitt, describing how Fauci sought to discredit lab-leak theories about COVID-19. Landry urged the committee to pass legislation that would allow employee termination for First Amendment violations and to pass legislation allowing platform users to sue through a private right of action.

The witnesses made “outlandish” claims about Fauci and others, and Democrats should have had the chance to challenge those statements, said Lynch. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said Democrats would be given their five minutes of questioning, but Lynch noted Schmitt and Landry had left. “They have scurried away with your complicity,” said Lynch: “They refuse to defend” their statements. Subcommittee ranking member Stacey Plaskett, D-V.I., said, “If allowing them to leave is not weaponization, I don’t know what is Mr. Chairman.” Lynch’s motion to adjourn failed on a 12-7 party-line vote.

The Democrats’ lone witness, Stanford Constitutional Law Center professor Matthew Seligman, dismissed arguments from Landry and Schmitt. Their contention that the federal government coerced platforms into censoring disfavored speech through the application of the platforms’ own content moderation policies “lacks a reasonable basis in law and fact,” he said. Biden administration officials offered suggestions about misinformation without any threat of adverse governmental action ever attached to whether platforms followed those suggestions, he said. Schmitt claimed Biden officials threatened to remove Communications Decency Act Section 230 liability protections if platforms refused to follow their suggestions.

Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., noted Seligman works at Stanford, where less than two weeks ago Law School Dean Jenny Martinez ordered First Amendment training for faculty and students after they “shouted down” 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Stuart Duncan. Thursday’s hearing is illustrative of Democrats' attempts to censor, he said. Lynch said if the panel refuses to allow cross-examination, the testimony should be struck, which is the practice in federal courts.

Fauci was evasive in his deposition in the case, testified Louisiana Special Assistant Attorney General John Sauer. Fauci responded to questions with variations of the statement “I don’t recall” 174 times and variations of “I don’t remember” at least 212 times during his deposition, said Sauer. “Wow,” Jordan said. “Smartest man on the planet couldn’t remember 212 times.”

Sauer said Fauci “couldn’t remember things he told the national media” that he remembered “very well.” Jordan said the subcommittee is seeking documents from the agencies and tech companies involved in the case. Plaskett said the narrative that conservatives are censored on social media is “nonsense”: Mainstream platforms amplify conservative voices all the time, promoting “false and dangerous” narratives.