They canceled Tucker, now they’re coming for us… but you can fight back. Cancel Fox Nation and instead click here to subscribe to Revolver. Or give the gift of Revolver—simply select the annual subscription and select “This is a gift” on the next page. If you want to give extra during this critical time, you can make a one-time or recurring monthly donation — whether it’s $1 or $1,000, every bit goes towards the battle to save our great nation.

There was a lot of understandable trepidation amongst right-wingers when Elon Musk announced the new Twitter CEO. Her name is Linda Yaccarino and she has deep connections to the World Economic Forum, which is promoting “PGLE.” What is PGLE, you may be asking? Well, it’s a communist alliance between corporations and the globalist world regime.

In a nutshell, PGLE stands for the “Partnership for Global LGBTQI+ Equality,” which includes more than 270 companies that have endorsed the United Nations Standards of Conduct. PGLE is a collective working towards advancing LGBTQ+ policies in the business world and beyond. That’s why you’re witnessing companies like Bud Light and Target actively supporting LGBTQ+ initiatives, much to their own detriment. This is a social credit system similar to China’s, that’s now being implemented in America and backed by the WEF, where the CEO of Twitter is an active member.

Could her relationship with WEF and the PGLE initiative be the reason why a recent deal between Twitter and Daily Wire fell through? That’s what many people are wondering after Twitter backed out of the deal to air the Daily Wire documentary, “What Is a Woman” over two instances of so-called “misgendering.”

Jeremy Boreing, the co-founder of Daily Wire too to Twitter and called out the “misgendering snub” in a viral thread.

Twitter canceled a deal with @realdailywire to premiere What is a Woman? for free on the platform because of two instances of “misgendering.” I’m not kidding. Here’s what happened:

One year ago today, we released What is a Woman?. To celebrate the occasion and expand the movie’s already enormous impact, we decided to give it away for free for 24 hours on Twitter.

With Twitter’s recent commitments to free speech, we thought it would be the perfect place to distribute the film and drive the conversation forward on one of the most important topics of our day.

Twitter responded with enthusiasm and offered us the opportunity to buy a package to host the movie on a dedicated event page and to promote the event to every Twitter user over the first 10 hours.

We accepted and signed an agreement. After we signed, Twitter asked to see the film to better understand what parts may “trigger” users, so they could better prepare their response. They said they were still all hands on deck for launch, so we sent them a screener.

After reviewing the film, though, Twitter let us know that not only could we no longer purchase the package they offered, they would no longer provide us any support and would actually limit the reach of the film and label it as “hateful conduct” because of “misgendering.”

Specifically: In the film, a father refers to his 14-year-old daughter as “her,” and a store owner uses the “wrong” pronoun in a confrontation with a trans person.

We reminded Twitter they removed “misgendering” from their policy, that the term “misgendering” itself is misleading, and that enforcing such a policy places them on the side of the most radical elements in society – the side most opposed to their commitment to free speech.

Twitter clarified they only removed “misgendering” from their policy because they didn’t need to be that specific, but that they still consider “misgendering” abuse and harassment. They gave us the opportunity to edit the film to comply. We declined.

When we asked how much they would limit the visibility if we posted the film anyway, Twitter replied that our own followers would not be able to see it in their feeds. This, they said, is part of their “speech not reach” policy.

Of course, saying “you have the right to speak, but we’ll make sure no one hears you” is a bit like saying “you have the right to cast a vote, but we’ll make sure it isn’t counted.” That’s not a right at all!

We brought all our shows to Twitter Tuesday because we believed Twitter was committed to free speech, especially on this issue. After all, the @TheBabylonBee was silenced on Twitter over this very issue, and that in part prompted @elonmusk to purchase the platform.

The other tech platforms have already decided where they stand in the trans debate and demonetize and deprioritize all those who disagree. Now, Twitter has joined the ranks of the other tech superpowers in ensuring one side of the debate is suppressed.

@elonmusk is not beholden to conservatives. He has the right to run his business as he sees fit. But if Twitter is going to throttle one side of one of the most important debates facing society, it cannot claim to champion free speech.

I hope @elonmusk will reconsider this awful policy. If we can’t debate these issues on Twitter, where can we debate them? If conservatives aren’t welcome on Twitter, where are they welcome? It’s unlikely another centibillionaire will come along to offer an alternative.

We plan to post the movie anyway tonight at 8:00 pm eastern. Will Twitter make good on their threat to throttle it and label it “hateful conduct,” or will Twitter live up to its great promise? We’ll all find out together.

The two “misgendering” clips that ended he deal were posted by Matt Walsh but they have already been censored by the Twitter Censorship Overlords; you can find them here and here.

Twitter’s current policy of “freedom of speech but not freedom of reach” would  restrict users from seeing content from accounts they have personally decided to follow. With the growing number of paying users on Twitter, it is reasonable for them to expect full access to tweets from the accounts they follow. This prevents a return to the previous situation, under former CEOs Jack and Parag, where Twitter employees and algorithms had control over what content was visible.

According to documentary host Matt Walsh, Daily Wire will be streaming “What Is A Woman” free for everybody on Twitter tonight. Walsh says Twitter will will label the film “hate speech” and suppress it. And it seems those efforts are already underway.

Matt goes on to say that this is a “gross betrayal of the free speech promises” they have made to their users.

Perplexingly, Elon Musk just barely finished giving an interview to the Babylon Bee in which he claimed there will be no “compromise” on free speech, “even if it means lost revenue”.

Seth Dillon:

In the interview we just released, Musk reaffirmed his commitment to free speech, saying there will be no compromise, even if it means lost revenue. He also said that Tucker Carlson’s main concern was the possibility of censorship. Elon assured Tucker that lawful speech would not be censored. Tucker only announced he’d be bringing his show to Twitter after getting that assurance.

Seems like someone over there hasn’t gotten the free speech memo.

Just moments ago, Elon Musk finally addressed this bizarre situation, stating that misgendering actually is allowed on the platform, even though he considers it “rude”.

This was a mistake by many people at Twitter. It is definitely allowed.

Whether or not you agree with using someone’s preferred pronouns, not doing so is at most rude and certainly breaks no laws.

I should note that I do personally use someone’s preferred pronouns, just as I use someone’s preferred name, simply from the standpoint of good manners.

However, for the same reason, I object to rude behavior, ostracism or threats of violence if the wrong pronoun or name is used.

Elon’s response curiously fails to mention the censorious, ADL-inspired “freedom of speech not freedom of reach” policy, or if tweets that “misgender”, like those from Matt Walsh, will be “throttled” or not. Currently, the Walsh videos are still “deboosted”.

It remains to be seen if Elon Musk will unthrottle the Matt Walsh videos and allow “What Is a Woman” to freely stream on the platform. This decision has the potential to turn into something bigger down the road. It may set a precedent for Twitter to cater to the social justice demands of Europe; as they may be hesitant to lose the revenue stream from overseas advertisers. This pivotal moment poses a challenge for Elon, who has proudly identified himself as a “free speech absolutist.”

The question now is will he rise up and back his words with actions, or will he yield to the regimes progressive agenda? We’ll know soon enough.