Many large tech companies lean Left and are overwhelmingly supportive of the Radical Left. But they take it too far when they interfere.
And now, a massive liberal tech company is facing a stunning loss because of their horrific attempts.
On Wednesday, Senator Roger Marshall took a bold stand against Big Tech by calling for the subpoena of Google executives to appear before the Senate Homeland Committee.
Marshall’s demand comes on the heels of Google’s controversial omission of the Trump assassination attempt from its search autocomplete feature, despite showing suggestions for other famous assassination attempts throughout history. This move has sparked outrage among conservatives, who see it as another example of Big Tech’s bias against Republican voices, particularly President Donald Trump.
Marshall, a staunch Trump ally and conservative voice in the Senate, made his frustration known on X (formerly Twitter). In a fiery post, he wrote, “Weeks after the assassination attempt that left President Donald Trump within centimeters of his life, Google is still defending its misinformation, declaring the assassination attempt a ‘hypothetical act of political violence.’ Google’s top executives must come before the Senate Homeland Committee IMMEDIATELY. We are launching a full investigation into Google’s litany of failures & history of suppressing conservative viewpoints. Time for accountability—time for top-down subpoenas.”
Marshall’s statement was accompanied by a letter from Google, in which the tech giant defended its decision to block autocompletes for hypothetical acts of violence against current political figures.
According to the letter, Google’s systems are designed to prevent autocompletes that suggest political violence toward current figures, in contrast to historical figures such as President Truman or Ronald Reagan, for whom autocompletes are allowed.
Google’s letter to Senator Marshall is at the heart of the controversy. The tech company explained that its systems are built to avoid providing search predictions for hypothetical violence involving current political leaders. “As discussed, these protections are not event-specific but rather applied to categories of possible searches,” the letter read.
“As a result, prior to July 13, 2024, it would have been inappropriate for our systems to offer any predictions involving possible assassination attempts on President Trump. In the immediate aftermath of the horrific events in Butler, PA, these systems were still in place and predictions related to the assassination attempt failed to appear.”
Google went on to acknowledge that its systems were “out of date” and claimed to have made adjustments following the incident. However, this admission has done little to quell the anger from conservatives who see this as yet another case of selective censorship.
It’s worth noting that this is not the first time Google has been accused of bias. In fact, accusations of political favoritism have dogged the tech giant for years.
Whether it’s the suppression of conservative news outlets in search results or alleged preferential treatment of liberal media, Google has been a frequent target of criticism from the political right. However, this particular case strikes a deeper nerve, as it involves an assassination attempt on a former U.S. president—a matter of national security and historical significance.
The July 13, 2024, assassination attempt on President Trump during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, was a shocking and sobering reminder of the violent political climate we live in today. The would-be assassin, Thomas Matthew Crooks, was apprehended at the scene, but not before firing shots that narrowly missed Trump.
The event left the nation reeling and spurred renewed calls for political unity and civility—yet the omission of this event from Google’s autocomplete search function has raised eyebrows.
In the days following the assassination attempt, Google users began to notice that typing “Trump assassination attempt” into the search bar yielded no suggestions. In contrast, search queries for assassination attempts on historical figures like Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, and Teddy Roosevelt produced instant results. This glaring omission led many conservatives to accuse Google of intentionally downplaying the Trump assassination attempt in an effort to suppress information unfavorable to their political leanings.
Senator Marshall wasted no time in launching a full investigation into Google’s handling of the Trump assassination attempt in its search engine. In early July, Marshall wrote to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, stating, “Google’s failure to provide suggestions related to the assassination attempt against President Trump on July 13, 2024, as part of its search function is yet another example of censorship against conservative voices and violates the intent of Section 230.”
Marshall’s reference to Section 230, a provision of the Communications Decency Act, is significant. This law has long shielded tech companies from liability for user-generated content on their platforms.
However, it has come under fire from conservatives, who argue that Big Tech companies like Google and Facebook have abused this protection by acting as gatekeepers of information, selectively censoring conservative viewpoints while allowing liberal voices to flourish.
Marshall went on to accuse Google of “willful discrimination” against President Trump and its users. “Google’s omission of suggestions to the most obvious and recent victim of an assassination attempt shows a willful discrimination against President Trump and users of your search engine. Furthermore, Google’s decision to selectively erect hurdles to those seeking to obtain more information regarding one of the most important events in recent American history places you in the role of information arbiter, well beyond the scope of your firm’s purported purpose,” he wrote.
The debate over Google’s handling of the Trump assassination attempt is more than just a conservative grievance—it speaks to the broader concern about the role of Big Tech in shaping the flow of information. For years, conservatives have voiced concerns that Silicon Valley giants are using their platforms to suppress dissenting voices, manipulate political discourse, and stifle free speech. These concerns have only grown in recent years as evidence of bias continues to emerge.
Senator Marshall’s call for Google executives to testify before the Senate Homeland Committee represents a significant escalation in the ongoing battle between conservatives and Big Tech.
If Google is found to have intentionally suppressed search results related to the Trump assassination attempt, it could lead to renewed calls for reforming or repealing Section 230, as well as further investigations into other tech companies accused of similar behavior.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. As the 2024 presidential election approaches, the role of Big Tech in influencing public opinion will be under intense scrutiny. With President Trump already a divisive figure and a favorite target of Silicon Valley elites, any perceived bias against him or his supporters will only serve to deepen the divide between conservatives and the tech industry.
As Senator Marshall continues to press for accountability from Google, the larger question of Big Tech’s role in shaping the political narrative remains front and center. Is this just another case of a “glitch” or outdated system, as Google claims, or is it a deliberate attempt to suppress information that conservatives have a right to know?
Only time will tell whether Google’s executives will face the full force of congressional subpoenas or if this controversy will fade into the background. One thing is clear, however: the battle for control of information is far from over, and conservative voices like Senator Marshall’s are not backing down.
Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.
