Judges Impose New Type Of Censorship: ‘Banned From The Internet’

Gina Bisignano, owner of a Beverly Hills eyelash and skin care salon, was charged with taking part in the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, where police used tear gas. Under a court ban, if Bisignano goes online while awaiting trial, she risks being jailed. (FBI )
Please Share This Story!
image_pdfimage_print
The newest form of extreme censorship is to simply ban someone from accessing the Internet at all. The charge is spreading disinformation and fake news, which is subjectively in the eyes of the beholder. This could become comparable to “no fly lists” for suspected terrorists. ⁃ TN Editor

Beverly Hills esthetician and eyelash stylist Gina Bisignano was so present on social media that the federal criminal complaint against her practically wrote itself.

The story of a 52-year-old salon owner who charted a dark path of disinformation to the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, where she allegedly grabbed a bullhorn and urged rioters to take up weapons, is backed by one social media post after another embedded in the Department of Justice filing.

There is Bisignano in her Louis Vuitton sweater, filmed in front of the Capitol talking about her business and hometown as the riot was getting underway. There she is again, addressing rioters with a rant about globalists, George Soros and stolen votes. And again, calling for weapons and gas masks moments before a rioter attacks an officer with what appears to be a baseball bat.

Now, Bisignano has gone silent online. She is not allowed on the internet. Not because social media platforms banned her, but because a federal judge did. If Bisignano goes online while awaiting trial, she risks being jailed.

Judges have long been reluctant to ban anyone from the internet, a restriction that essentially cuts a person off from much of modern society and has been reserved mostly for accused and convicted pedophiles. But as toxic disinformation becomes an increasingly dangerous threat, driving domestic terrorism and violence, the courts are facing vexing new questions around how often and under what circumstances those accused of taking part should be taken offline altogether.

“We are headed into uncharted waters,” said Nina Jankowicz, a fellow at the Wilson Center, a Washington think tank, where she studies disinformation. “Given the threats we see continuing and the heightened alerts, it is clear things are not dissipating. … That is why judges are making these calls.”

In the case of Bisignano, the ban might have been an easy one for the judge to make. The defendant asked for it. Her lawyer saw it as one of the few bargaining chips the Capitol riot suspect from California had to stay out of jail for now.

“If it weren’t for social media, she wouldn’t even be a defendant,” said Bisignano’s attorney, Charles Peruto. “She knows that is what got her jammed in the first place.”

Yet attorneys for others accused of taking part in the attack on the Capitol are aggressively fighting the restrictions, and judges are struggling with how far to take them.

Prosecutors have moved to bar at least five defendants in the Capitol insurrection from going on social media platforms or even going online at all, according to a review of court filings by The Times. Those defendants are awaiting trial dates that will be months away as the Justice Department grapples with one of the most complex and all-consuming investigations in its history.

They include John Sullivan, a Utah man accused of obstructing Congress as he allegedly joined the rampage through the Capitol in tactical gear, encouraging rioters to do damage. Over the objections of prosecutors, a federal magistrate judge ruled Sullivan may continue supervised use of Facebook, Twitter and “encrypted platforms.”

In arguing for the ban, prosecutors pointed to video of Sullivan threatening police, breaking a window and telling other rioters “we gotta get this s— burned.”

Yet Sullivan’s attorney, Steve Kiersh, argued that the defendant was there as a journalist, claiming he sold some of his footage to news networks. He accused prosecutors of trying to impede his client’s ability “to communicate the way the vast majority of Americans communicate.” The restriction, Kiersh wrote in a court filing, would prevent Sullivan from keeping up with friends and family online or even checking the news, as media websites, which invite user comments, fall under the umbrella of social media.

Such concerns drove the U.S. Supreme Court in 2017 to strike down a North Carolina law that prohibited convicted sex offenders from using social media platforms. The court found that the ban unconstitutionally put out of reach “what for many are the principal sources for knowing current events, checking ads for employment, speaking and listening in the modern public square, and otherwise exploring the vast realms of human thought and knowledge.”

“Courts are recognizing that social media is very important to people’s lives in a number of ways,” said Alexis Karteron, director of the Rutgers Constitutional Rights Clinic. In September, the Rutgers clinic and the American Civil Liberties Union persuaded a federal court to block enforcement of a New York law broadly banning social media use by sex offenders.

“There are unquestionably serious rights at stake,” Karteron said.

Read full story here…

About the Author

Patrick Wood
Patrick Wood is a leading and critical expert on Sustainable Development, Green Economy, Agenda 21, 2030 Agenda and historic Technocracy. He is the author of Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation (2015) and co-author of Trilaterals Over Washington, Volumes I and II (1978-1980) with the late Antony C. Sutton.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
14 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] Sourced from: Technocracy News & Trends […]

[…] Sourced from: Technocracy News & Trends […]

Al

Wouldn’t it just be easier for the Govt to shoot her in the head instead of going through all these machinations to silence her? That way they only violate one of her rights, right to Life, instead of speech, assembly, etc…

Lawrence King

Big guy for you to endorse killing people.

Last edited 17 days ago by Lawrence King
DawnieR

Where the hell do these CRIMINAL ‘judges’ get off in ‘banning’ someones SPEECH when they have done NOTHING WRONG!! Child-molesting-PEDOS have more Rights than Law-abiding AMERICANS! One day, really SOON, AMERICANS will have had ENOUGH of these CRIMINAL TYRANTS, and WILL take back the country, BY FORCE! And it WILL start ‘local’…..with the so-called PUBLIC SERVANTS who THINK that they are GODS and CAN do these kinds of things! The Day of Reckoning…….IS COMING!!

justsayin

There is a spiritual war going on. It can be seen clearly. When people drive in their cars with masks on, or wear two masks and gloves this is proof that spiritually speaking they have been sucked in to the great mass deception, they do not have their own mind. It begins with legalizing drugs, and mass drug use which massively took hold in the 60’s. They are not a threat anymore, they don’t have their own mind. When men and women started killing their babies, they too lost their mind, because if you do not believe it is murder,… Read more »

Last edited 26 days ago by justsayin

[…] Judges Impose New Type Of Censorship: “Banned From The Internet” (Richter für neue Art der Zens… „The newest form of extreme censorship is to simply ban someone from accessing the Internet at all. The charge is spreading disinformation and fake news, which is subjectively in the eyes of the beholder. This could become comparable to “no fly lists” for suspected terrorists. […]“ (d) […]

[…] Impose New Type Of Censorship: ‘Banned From The Internet’https://www.technocracy.news/judges-impose-new-type-of-censorship-banned-from-the-internetGina Bisignano, owner of a Beverly Hills eyelash and skin care salon, was charged with taking part […]

trackback

[…] Judges Impose New Type Of Censorship: ‘Banned From The Internet’ […]

[…] Source: Technocracy.news […]

[…] week:Story #1: Judges Impose New Type Of Censorship: ‘Banned From The Internet’https://www.technocracy.news/judges-impose-new-type-of-censorship-banned-from-the-internet/‘Uncharted Waters.’ Judges Are Banning Some Capitol Riot Suspects From the […]