Texas State Board of Education advisers signal push to the right in social studies overhaul
Some advisers have criticized diversity efforts, questioned the historical contributions of people of color, and promoted debunked beliefs.The Texas State Board of Education launched the process of redesigning the state’s social studies standards earlier this year. Trace Thomas for The Texas Tribune
The Texas State Board of Education is reshaping how public schools will teach social studies for years to come, but its recent selection of the panelists who will advise members during the process is causing concern among educators, historians and both Democrats and Republicans, who say the panel’s composition is further indication that the state wants to prioritize hard-right conservative viewpoints.
The Republican-dominated education board earlier this year officially launched the process of redesigning Texas’ social studies standards, which outline in detail what students should know by the time of graduation. The group, which will meet again in mid-November, is aiming to finalize the standards by next summer, with classroom implementation expected in 2030.
A majority of the 15 members in September agreed on the instructional framework schools will use in each grade to teach social studies, already marking a drastic shift away from Texas’ current approach. The board settled on a plan with a heavy focus on Texas and U.S. history and less emphasis on world history, geography and cultures. Conservative groups like Texas Public Policy Foundation and the Heritage Foundation championed the framework, while educators largely opposed it.
In the weeks that followed, the board selected a panel of nine advisers who will offer feedback and recommendations during the process. The panel appears to include only one person currently working in a Texas public school district and has at least three people associated with far-right conservative activism. That includes individuals who have criticized diversity efforts, questioned school lessons highlighting the historical contributions of people of color, and promoted beliefs debunked by historians that America was founded as a Christian nation.
That group includes David Barton, a far-right conservative Christian activist who gained national prominence arguing against common interpretations of the First Amendment’s establishment clause, which prevents the government from endorsing or promoting a religion. Barton believes that America was founded as a Christian nation, which many historians have disproven.
Critics of Barton’s work have pointed to his lack of formal historical training and a book he authored over a decade ago, “The Jefferson Lies,” that was pulled from the shelves due to historical details “that were not adequately supported.” Brandon Hall, an Aledo Republican who co-appointed Barton, has defended the decision, saying it reflected the perspectives and priorities of his district.
Another panelist is Jordan Adams, a self-described independent education consultant who holds degrees from Hillsdale College, a Michigan-based campus known nationally for its hard-right political advocacy and efforts to shape classroom instruction in a conservative Christian vision. Adams’ desire to flip school boards and overhaul social studies instruction in other states has drawn community backlash over recommendations on books and curriculum that many felt reflected his political bias.
Adams has proclaimed that “there is no such thing” as expertise, describing it as a label to “shut down any type of dialogue and pretend that you can’t use your own brain to figure things out.” He has called on school boards to craft policies to eliminate student surveys, diversity efforts and what he considers “critical race theory,” a college-level academic and legal framework examining how racism is embedded in laws, policies and institutions. Critical race theory is not taught in K-12 public schools but has become a shorthand for conservative criticism of how schools teach children about race.
In an emailed response to questions from The Texas Tribune, Adams pointed to his earlier career experience as a teacher and said he understands “what constitutes quality teaching.” Adams also said he wants to ensure “Texan students are taught using the best history and civics standards in America” and that he views the purpose of social studies as forming “wise and virtuous citizens who know and love their country.”
“Every teacher in America falls somewhere along the political spectrum, and all are expected to set their personal views aside when teaching. The same goes for myself and my fellow content advisors,” Adams said. “Of course, given that this is public education, any efforts must support the U.S. Constitution and Texas Constitution, principles of the American founding, and the perpetuation of the American experiment in free self-government.”
Republicans Aaron Kinsey and LJ Francis, who co-appointed Adams, could not be reached for interviews.
David Randall, executive director of the Civics Alliance and research director of the National Association of Scholars, was also appointed a content adviser. He has criticized standards he felt were “animated by a radical identity-politics ideology” and hostile to America and “groups such as whites, men, and Christians.” Randall has written that vocabulary emphasizing “systemic racism, power, bias, and diversity” cannot coexist with “inquiry into truth — much less affection for America.” He has called the exclusion of the Bible and Christianity in social studies instruction “bizarre,” adding that no one “should find anything controversial” about teaching the role of “Judeo-Christian values” in colonial North America.
Randall told the Tribune in an email that his goal is to advise Texas “as best I can.” He did not respond to questions about his expertise and how he would work to ensure his personal beliefs do not bleed into the social studies revisions.
Randall was appointed by Republican board members Evelyn Brooks and Audrey Young, both of whom told the Tribune that they chose him not because of his political views but because of his national expertise in history and civics, which they think can help Texas improve social studies instruction.
“I really can’t sit here and say that I agree with everything he has said. I don’t even know everything that he has said.” Brooks said. “What I can say is that I can refer to his work. I can say that he emphasizes integrating civics.”
The advisory panel also consists of a social studies curriculum coordinator in the Prosper school district and university professors with expertise ranging from philosophy to military studies. The group notably includes Kate Rogers, former president of the Alamo Trust, who recently resigned from her San Antonio post after Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick criticized her over views she expressed in a doctoral dissertation suggesting she disagreed with state laws restricting classroom instruction on race and slavery.
Seven of the content advisers were selected by two State Board of Education members each, while Texas’ Commissioner of Higher Education Wynn Rosser chose the two other panelists. Board member Tiffany Clark, a Democrat, did not appoint an adviser, and she told the Tribune that she plans to hold a press conference during the board’s November meeting to address what happened.
Staci Childs, a Democrat from Houston serving on the State Board of Education, said she had anticipated that the content advisory group would include “extremely conservative people.” But her colleagues’ choices, she said, make her feel like “kids are not at the forefront right now.”
Pam Little, who is the board’s vice chair, is one of two members who appear to have chosen the only content adviser with active experience working in a Texas K-12 public school district. The Fairview Republican called the makeup of the advisory panel “disappointing.”
“I think it signals that we’re going in a direction where we teach students what we want them to know, rather than what really happened,” Little said.
The board’s recent decisions show that some members are more focused “on promoting political agendas rather than teaching the truth,” said Rocío Fierro-Pérez, political director of the Texas Freedom Network, a progressive advocacy organization that monitors the State Board of Education’s decisions.
“Whether your political beliefs are conservative, liberal, or middle of the road really shouldn’t disqualify you from participating in the process to overhaul these social studies standards,” Fierro-Pérez said. “But it’s wildly inappropriate to appoint unqualified political activists and professional advocates with their own agendas, in leading roles and guiding what millions of Texas kids are going to be learning in classrooms.”
Other board members and content advisers insist that it is too early in the process to make such judgments. They say those discussions should wait until the actual writing of the standards takes place, which is when the board can directly address concerns about the new framework.
They also note that while content advisers play an integral role in offering guidance, the process will include groups of educators who help write the standards. State Board of Education members will then make final decisions. Recent years have shown that even those within the board’s 10-member Republican majority often disagree with one another, making the final result of the social studies revisions difficult to predict.
Donald Frazier, a Texas historian at Schreiner University in Kerrville and chair of Texas’ 1836 Project advisory committee, who was also appointed a content adviser, said that based on the panelists’ conversations so far, “I think that there’s a lot more there than may meet the eye.”
“There’s people that have thought about things like pedagogy and how children learn and educational theory, all the way through this panel,” Frazier said. “There’s always going to be hand-wringing and pearl-clutching and double-guessing and second-guessing. We’ve got to keep our eye on the students of Texas and what we want these kids to be able to do when they graduate to become functioning members of our society.”
The makeup of the advisory panel and the Texas-heavy instructional framework approved in September is the latest sign of frustration among conservative Republicans who often criticize how public schools approach topics like race and gender. They have passed laws in recent years placing restrictions on how educators can discuss those topics and pushed for instruction to more heavily emphasize American patriotism and exceptionalism.
Under the new framework, kindergarteners through second graders will learn about the key people, places and events throughout Texas and U.S. history. The plan will weave together in chronological order lessons on the development of Western civilization, the U.S., and Texas during grades 3-8, with significant attention on Texas and the U.S. after fifth grade. Eighth-grade instruction will prioritize Texas, as opposed to the broader focus on national history that currently exists. The framework also eliminates the sixth-grade world cultures course.
When lessons across all grades are combined, Texas will by far receive the most attention, while world history will receive the least — though world history would receive more time under the new framework than the one currently used.
During a public comment period in September, educators criticized the new plan’s lack of attention to geography and cultures outside of America. They opposed how it divides instruction on Texas, U.S. and world history into percentages every school year, as opposed to providing students an entire grade to fully grasp one or two social studies concepts at a time. They said the plan’s strict chronological structure could disrupt how kids identify historical trends and cause-and-effect relationships, which can happen more effectively through a thematic instructional approach.
But that criticism did not travel far with some Republicans, who argue that drastic changes in education will almost always prompt negative responses from educators accustomed to teaching a certain way. They point to standardized test results showing less than half of Texas students performing at grade level in social studies as evidence that the current instructional approach is not working. They also believe the politicization of education began long before the social studies overhaul, but in a way that prioritizes left-leaning perspectives.
“Unfortunately, I think it boils down to this: What’s the alternative?” said Matthew McCormick, education director of the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation. “It always seems to come down to, if it’s not maximally left-wing, then it’s conservative indoctrination. That’s my perspective. What is the alternative to the political and policymaking process? Is it to let teachers do whatever they want? Is it to let the side that lost the elections do what they want? I’m not sure. There’s going to be judgments about these sorts of things.”
This is not the first time the board has garnered attention for its efforts to reshape social studies instruction. The group in 2022 delayed revisions to the standards after pressure from Republican lawmakers who complained that they downplayed Texan and American exceptionalism and amounted to far-left indoctrination. Texas was also in the national spotlight roughly a dozen years prior for the board’s approval of standards that reflected conservative viewpoints on topics like religion and economics.
Social studies teachers share the sentiment that Texas can do a better job equipping students with knowledge about history, geography, economics and civics, but many push back on the notion that they’re training children to adhere to a particular belief system. With challenges like budget shortfalls and increased class sizes, they say it is shortsighted to blame Texas’ academic shortcomings on educators or the current learning standards — not to mention that social studies instruction often takes a backseat to subjects like reading and math.
“I think we’re giving a lot more credit to this idea that we’re using some sort of political motivation to teach. We teach the standards. The standards are there. That’s what we teach,” said Courtney Williamson, an eighth-grade social studies teacher at a school district northwest of Austin.
When students graduate, some will compete for global jobs. Others may go to colleges across the U.S. or even internationally. That highlights the importance, educators say, of providing students with a broad understanding of the world around them and teaching them how to think critically.
But with the recent moves requiring a significant overhaul of current instruction — a process that will likely prove labor-intensive and costly — some educators suspect that Texas leaders’ end goal is to establish a public education system heavily reliant on state-developed curricula and training. That’s the only way some can make sense of the new teaching framework or the makeup of the content advisory panel.
“I’m really starting to notice an atmosphere of fear from a lot of people in education, both teachers and, I think, people higher up in districts,” said Amy Ceritelli-Plouff, a sixth-grade world cultures teacher in North Texas. “When you study history, you look at prior conflicts and times in our history when there has been extremism and maybe too much government control or involvement in things; it starts with censoring and controlling education.”
Disclosure: Schreiner University, Texas Freedom Network and Texas Public Policy Foundation have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/oct/12/meta-ai-adviser-robby-starbuck
Critics condemn Robby Starbuck, appointed in lawsuit settlement, for ‘peddling lies and pushing extremism’
Robby Starbuck speaks in an interview in New York in March. Photograph: Bess Adler/Bloomberg via Getty Images
A prominent anti-DEI campaigner appointed by Meta in August as an adviser on AI bias has spent the weeks since his appointment spreading disinformation about shootings, transgender people, vaccines, crime, and protests.
Robby Starbuck, 36, of Nashville, was appointed in August as an adviser by Meta – owner of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and other tech platforms – in an August lawsuit settlement.
Since his appointment, Starbuck has baselessly claimed that individual shooters in the US were motivated by leftist ideology, described faith-based protest groups as communists, and without evidence tied Democratic lawmakers to murders.
Starbuck’s online posts have not changed in tenor since the “anti-DEI agitator” was brought into the Meta fold, and his Trump administration connections raise broader questions about the extent to which corporate America has capitulated to the Maga movement.
The Guardian repeatedly contacted Meta for comment on Starbuck’s role, and his rhetoric online, but received no response.
The Guardian also contacted Starbuck via an email address associated with his website. In part, he responded: “It seems your piece is an attempted hit job meant to punish Meta for working with me on AI fairness. Nothing I’ve said has been on behalf of Meta – they work with people from every political background.”
He added: “My role is simple: work to make AI fair for everyone, regardless of their views. That’s a goal anyone who believes in fairness should support. What you’re really trying here looks like cancel culture and activism dressed up as journalism, and I won’t cower for holding the same views as the political party that won the popular vote less than a year ago in America.”
Heidi Beirich, the co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, said: “It is appalling that Robby Starbuck was given a hand in Meta operations in any capacity. He peddles lies and pushes extremism, and it is hard to believe any of this will help make their platforms safer or better.”
Eric Bloem, vice-president of corporate citizenship at the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, said: “People should be able to find safe, welcoming communities online. Robby Starbuck pushes a dangerous anti-LGBTQ agenda, spreading disinformation and denying the very existence of transgender people.”
Starbuck’s appointment to Meta via lawsuit
Starbuck, formerly a music video director, has gained attention as an opponent of corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. His pressure campaigns have frequently been directed at companies who are perceived as having conservative customer bases, and have induced major American firms to abandon internal DEI measures, or to end their relationships with pro-LGBTQ organizations like the Human Rights Campaign.
Starbuck won his role in the aftermath of one such campaign.
In the midst of a summer 2024 campaign aimed at motorcycle manufacturer Harley-Davidson, Starbuck threatened Meta with a lawsuit over claims its Meta AI chatbot apparently made about him. In August 2024, Starbuck posted a screenshot purporting to show Meta AI’s summary of a Facebook thread of Harley riders angry that the “company chose to go woke “.
A screenshot in reply from a Harley-Davidson dealer appeared to show Meta AI asserting that Starbuck was, among other things, an adherent of the QAnon conspiracy theory, and had participated in the January 6 attack at the Capitol.
Starbuck responded: “Wow thanks for sending, Meta will hear from my lawyers since I was never at J6 and have been a longtime critic of QAnon.”
That lawsuit was filed last April. Starbuck’s appointment to work with Meta was part of the settlement. Other details of the settlement – including whether or not Starbuck was paid or is receiving ongoing compensation for the role – were not made public.
On 8 August, Meta’s chief of global affairs Joel Kaplan posted on X a joint statement with Starbuck.
In part, the statement read: “Since engaging on these important issues with Robby, Meta has made tremendous strides to improve the accuracy of Meta AI and mitigate ideological and political bias.”
The statement continued: “Building on that work, Meta and Robby Starbuck will work collaboratively in the coming months to continue to find ways to address issues of ideological and political bias and minimize the risk that the model returns hallucinations in response to user queries.”
Bloem said: “There’s nothing unbiased about [Starbuck’s appointment].” He added: “Coupled with its January rollback of protections against hate speech across its platforms, this decision calls into question Meta’s commitment to keeping LGBTQ+ people and others safe online.”
‘Portland is working with the terrorists’
Starbuck has long pushed vaccine disinformation, and he has amplified false claims made by health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr.
In July, he boosted a debunked claim made by Kennedy in an interview with Tucker Carlson, in which he claimed that hepatitis B vaccinations led to a 1,135% increase in autism risk, adding: “This is absolutely criminal. The people behind this belong in jail and the hep B shot should be pulled immediately from the childhood vaccine schedule.”
As part of his anti-DEI push, Starbuck has also spread overheated claims and falsehoods about transgender and LGBTQ people.
He has also boosted such claims made by members of the Trump administration.
In March, boosting a claim Donald Trump made in an address to Congress that the government had spent “$8m for making mice transgender”, Starbuck wrote: “Democrats are trying to pretend that Trump was wrong about the government funding a study to turn mice transgender. He was NOT wrong. This is the study and it’s vile. Eighty female mice were ‘sacrificed’ after their last injection. Democrats funded this.”
In fact, the mice studies sought to gauge the effect of hormone therapy on maladies such as wound-healing, HIV, and infertility.
Starbuck’s online demeanor has continued largely unchanged since he was appointed, with him backing far-right figures in America and around the world and posting dubious pro-Trump narratives.
Starbuck recently expressed support for authoritarians and he posted a video of Stephen Miller’s speech on the Memphis Safe Task Force, which has seen federal officers and national guard troops making arrests in there.
Starbuck added the caption: “I’ve been advocating for us to make Memphis safe again for YEARS now by carrying out similar initiatives @nayibbukele executed successfully in El Salvador and finally… It’s happening.”
El Salvador president Nayib Bukele, self-styled as the “world’s coolest dictator”, is celebrated by the far right in the US for his unconstitutional crackdown, which has seen up to more than 1.5% of the country’s population imprisoned, almost a quarter of those without trial, according to World Prison Brief.
Starbuck also baselessly asserted that city officials in Portland were working with anti-fascists, and appeared to urge a violent response. Starbuck claimed that injuries to rightwing online personality Katie Daviscourt indicated that “the leftist government in Portland is working with the terrorists”, adding: “It’s time to treat Antifa cells like we would treat Isis cells.”
In a comment on this allegation, Starbuck wrote: “The record is not in dispute. Portland councillors Angelita Morillo and Candace Avalos both publicly defended an antifa activist charged with assaulting a federal officer. Morillo has even posted tips to help antifa evade law enforcement. “
He added: “When elected officials openly side with violent extremists, they are enabling them.”
Morillo told the Guardian: “When influencers like Robby refer to ‘terrorists’, I’m not sure who they’re talking about – the guy in the frog suit? The people doing the Cha-Cha Slide outside the Ice facility in Portland? I can’t take anyone seriously who relies on sensationalized clips, AI content and outright lies to inform their thinking.”
Avalos said: “People are free to say what they like on social media. That doesn’t make their statements true, and it doesn’t mean we have to take them at face value.
“As a federal judge found in her recent ruling against the administration, the idea that there are coordinated attacks from ‘antifa, and other domestic terrorists’, as Trump alleged on Truth Social, is simply ‘untethered to the facts’. Who should we listen to: a sitting federal judge or someone with a Twitter account?”
She added: “When I advise my constituents on how to protect themselves from federal agents acting unlawfully, I am speaking to the vast majority of Portlanders, who rightfully oppose fascism and are certainly not terrorists.”
Starbuck also claimed that a high profile Trump detainee who was once incarcerated in Bukele’s brutal Cecot prison that “Kilmar Abrego Garcia [is] almost certainly an MS-13 member”.
Two federal judges this year rejected the administration’s claims that Abrego Garcia is a member of MS13, and the government was ordered to facilitate his return from El Salvador.
Commenting on his allegation, Starbuck wrote: “This is simple: an immigration court, DHS, and the president of the United States all identified Garcia as an MS-13 member. Denying it is no longer reporting – it’s spin in the pursuit of your own make-believe narrative. So once again, my language was perfectly appropriate.”
(*** Editorial edit from Scottie. This statement above by lying Starbuck is completely false yet he does as most hateful bigots do and repeat forcefully as it if it was a truth everyone knows and given by go. It is the tatic of a scammer, he is lying yet the maga media will report what he says as truth when again it is a lie. This guy is perfect for the tRump party area, if we say it then it must be the truth because we say it. Hugs *** )
‘This is domestic terrorism’
In recent weeks, Starbuck has energetically attempted to connect the alleged perpetrators of high-profile shootings to the Democratic party.
These claims culminated in a video posted to X in which he claimed that “in less than 2 weeks there have been 5 domestic terrorism attacks by leftists”, citing the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the armed attack on an ABC affiliate in Sacramento, California; the attack on a wedding reception in Nashua, New Hampshire; and the attack on an Ice facility in Dallas. Another example he offered were purported chants of “Fuck Charlie Kirk!” by leftists in New York in the wake of Kirk’s death.
In an earlier post, he cited the same events and claimed: “This is domestic terrorism”.
The man accused of the Sacramento ABC attack does have a long history of posting anti-Trump messages on social media, according to prosecutors, and spent two decades as “a lobbyist for healthcare, tribal and labor interests”, according to the New York Times.
Evidence for connections between the other perpetrators and the Democratic party, or even the broader left, is either tenuous or non-existent.
The claim about chanting demonstrators appears to arise from mid-September videos of counterprotesters who, according to videos taken by independent journalists, disrupted a memorial vigil for Charlie Kirk in New York’s Washington Square. The identities, allegiances, and organizational affiliations of the counterprotesters are unspecified, and few media outlets reported on the story except Russian outlet Pravda.
However, Joshua Jahn, who turned his gun on himself after the Dallas Ice attack, was reportedly registered as an independent in Oklahoma, and was described by friends as someone with “a vaguely libertarian bent who despised both major parties and politicians generally, including Trump, but who didn’t engage with politics beyond that”, according to reporting by journalist Ken Klippenstein.
Hunter Nadeau, accused of killing one and wounding two others in an attack on a country club in Nashua, New Hampshire, reportedly yelled “Free Palestine” during the attack. But state attorney general John Formella said Nadeau “made a number of statements during the shooting and appeared to be attempting to cause chaos in the moment as opposed to showing a hate-based motivation”, according to NPR.
Formella added: “We don’t have any evidence to indicate that this was a hate-based act.”
Tyler Robinson, the man accused of Charlie Kirk’s murder, was reportedly registered as a non-partisan voter in Utah, although family members indicated he had moved politically to the left, according to prosecutors.
Nevertheless, investigators reportedly told NBC News that “thus far, there is no evidence connecting the suspect with any leftwing groups”.
All of the reporting clouding the political allegiances of the shooters was on the public record on 25 September, when Starbuck replied to an X user who challenged him that “every single one of the cases I just pointed out are leftists”, blaming “left wing leaders … and their crazy followers”.
Starbuck reiterated his claims about each shooter to the Guardian and linked to four sources he claimed supported him, including a Daily Mail story about Facebook posts by Joshua Jahn’s mother, and a protest footage video published to YouTube by one of the previously cited independent videographers.
He further responded with accusations about the Guardian, writing: “Why is the Guardian fixated on trying to downplay leftwing violence instead of investigating the clear surge of it?”
He added: “I don’t have the luxury of ignoring this reality – my security team and the FBI are actively handling ongoing death threats against me. The dismissiveness from outlets like yours makes you complicit in emboldening this violence.”
Meta adviser
The lawsuit that took Starbuck to Meta was carried out by a firm with Trump administration connections.
Dhillon Law Group (DLG) filed suit in Delaware on behalf of Starbuck. In a press release, the firm said Meta’s chatbot had made “provably false and defamatory statements” about Starbuck.
Between the original posts and the lawsuit, DLG founder Harmeet Dhillon was nominated and confirmed as Donald Trump’s assistant attorney general for civil rights. Trump named her as his pick in December and she was confirmed in April, weeks before Starbuck’s settlement.
According to Office of Government Ethics filings, Dhillon divested her ownership in Dhillon Law Group in the firm in favor of her brother, a non-equity partner in the firm.
In her 27 February ethics agreement, however, Dhillon wrote that she would “retain an interest in a portion of future recovery in 21 contingency fee cases based upon a fixed percentage of compensation”.
The Guardian contacted the justice department to ask whether Starbuck’s case was one of the 21 that Dhillon retained an interest in. Initially, an automated response warned that “during the current lapse in appropriations, this inbox will not be monitored on a regular basis”.
A spokesperson subsequently responded in an email, writing: “AAG Dhillon does not currently have any role in cases involving Mr Starbuck and their relationship is one of friendship and former client.”
The Guardian then asked whether or not she had a role in his case at the time it was settled in April.
The spokesperson said no.
The Guardian previously reported that Dhillon earned a six-figure salary as CEO of a nonprofit, the Center for American Liberty (CAL), according to filings from 2021, 2022 and 2023. During that period, Dhillon Law Group received more than $1.3m as a contractor to the organization over two years. Dhillon, several CAL clients and Dhillon Law attorneys also shared the services of the same Republican-aligned PR operative.
During Dhillon’s leadership, the CAL pursued a myriad of culture-war lawsuits on behalf of rightwing influencers, “de-transitioners” and parents of transgender children, and churches that had been subject to California’s pandemic restrictions.
Beirich, the extremism expert, said: “This is just another example of Meta caving to Trump and his allies, and bogus charges of political bias, and makes a mockery of fair content moderation on Meta’s various platforms.”
Elsewhere in his comments to the Guardian, Starbuck wrote: “You should be honest with Guardian readers about the fact that you’ve been accused of extremely close ties with antifa.”
Scottie's Playtime 