Google is Preemptively Censoring Former Attorney General Bill Barr's Statement that Hillary Clinton is Guilty of Sedition

For weeks the mainstream media successfully ignored the bombshells coming out of the first trial from the Durham investigation.1 When Hillary Clinton’s closest confidant and campaign manager, Robby Mook, admitted under oath that Hillary personally approved the Russiagate hoax in an effort to hobble and then drive Trump from office the media coverage was scant.2

Bill Barr just made it a lot harder for the media to ignore the Sussman trial. On Saturday the former attorney general explained exactly what he learned from the trial: Hillary Clinton’s actions were ‘seditious’.3 Almost immediately Big Tech sprung into action censoring and suppressing articles discussing Barr’s conclusion. For example, Google pre-emptively posted a warning for anyone searching for Bill Barr’s comments claiming that “it can sometimes take time for reliable sources to publish information” while suppressing the original source and its video of Barr’s statement.

It is almost as if Google operates a Minority Report type PreCrime system for search results that reflect negatively on their political allies. There was almost no coverage of Mook’s testimony and the little there was didn’t deny Hillary’s involvement instead it focused on whether her efforts were really the proximate cause of the Russiagate investigation.4 This lack of coverage left Google and Big Tech in general in the lurch on Saturday - without any competing story to use as a ‘fact-check’ to justify censorship/suppression of the attorney general’s conclusion they simply had to post a generic warning suggesting users come back in a few hours or days to give ‘fact-checkers’ time to write competing narratives.

It is one thing for Big Tech to blame third-party fact-checkers for their automated suppression/censorship of stories deemed to be misinformation and quite another to pre-emptively suppress/censor stories BEFORE AP, Politifact, and/or Snopes has deemed the stories to be misinformation. Ironically, Bill Barr’s statement seemed rather tame to anyone who has been following revelations from the Sussman trial:

"I thought we were heading into a constitutional crisis. I think whatever you think of Trump, the fact is that the whole Russiagate thing was a grave injustice. It appears to be a dirty political trick that was used first to hobble him and then potentially to drive him from office. I believe it is seditious."5

Presumably, the media had hoped the DC-based jury, filled with government employees and lawyers who donated and volunteered for Hillary’s campaign, would do their job for them.6 The media became even more complacent after the judge refused to remove a juror who admitted after the start of the trial that their daughter rowed crew with Sussman’s daughter (Sussman is the defendant).7 The same judge that decided Durham would not be allowed to present evidence proving the information Sussman gave to the FBI was disinformation provided by Hillary Clinton.8

If you haven’t been following the Sussman trial you can catch up by watching Robert Gouveia Esq. coverage of the trial (it is excellent): Sussman Trial YouTube Playlist. He’s even documented the trial, the evidence, and the players in a detailed MindMap:9

UPDATE: The jury acquitted Michael Sussmann, 57, on a charge that he lied when he allegedly denied he was acting on behalf of any client in alerting the FBI to claims that a secret server linked Trump and a Moscow bank.10