‘Non-biased, free speech’ Twitter rival Parler tops Apple App Store for first time

Social media app and Twitter rival Parler topped the Apple App Store list of most popular apps for the first time over the weekend. Research firm Apptopia reported downloads for the “non-biased, free speech” platform topped 310,000 over the past week, with the peak starting on Nov. 6. In the week prior, the app had been downloaded just over 150,000 times.

Parler No.1 on Apple App Store
Parler hits No.1 on Apple’s App Store

Chris Ciaccia for FOXBusiness:

Earlier this month, Parler CEO John Matze criticized what he described as Twitter and Facebook censorship surrounding the election, saying that the companies had “gone too far. He added that his app was “free of editorial bullies trying to tell you what to think.”

“Once you start content curation and you start fact-checking, you’re introducing bias and I don’t think that there’s any perfect group without bias, so in terms of being a platform for transparency and free speech, they’ve gone way too far,” Matze told “Mornings with Maria.”

n the interview with Maria Bartiromo, Matze added Twitter should not be exempt through Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, since it is acting as a publisher.

MacDailyNews Note: In June, after Twitter censored and suspended many users from meme-makers to heads of state, Parler hit number one on the Apple App Store’s News section.

This new No.1 mark is for the entire App Store, not just the News section.

MacDailyNews on Parler is here.

58 Comments

  1. He’s saying content should not be censored, yet he’s also saying internet “publishers” should be held responsible for the content on their sites (section 230). I don’t get it. Does that mean he’s taking legal responsibility for the content on his site?

    1. He’s saying that Parler doesn’t censor or add labels and so-called explanations to posts, so they’re not a publisher and therefore fall under Section 230 protection.

      Twitter is clearly a publisher, like Facebook, and need to be held accountable as a publisher, not protected under Section 230.

  2. I really prefer Parler.

    No “warning” tags from lefties on posts that don’t fit their narrative. Just FREE SPEECH.

    Parler is very refreshing! Twitter is a cesspool of censorship and groupthink.

    1. “No “warning” tags from lefties on posts that don’t fit their narrative. Just FREE SPEECH.” (Julia)

      So…

      When did free speech become freedom to lie and mislead?

      When did truth become a demonized “narrative?”

      Answer: when trump, the con man, became president and conned half the country.

      And now they’ve got their safe space, bless their hearts.

        1. Most Biden voters are, by definition, brain-dead. It’s the brain-dead voting for the brain-dead. Or, in many cases, the actual dead voting for the brain-dead.

          President Trump’s campaign can challenge the vote on the ground that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court unconstitutionally interfered with the state legislature’s sole authority over the time, place, and manner of federal elections and over the selection of presidential electors.

          If the federal Constitution directly grants those powers to the legislature of Pennsylvania, state courts have no authority to alter state election law for federal office, including the presidency. The Supreme Court could strike down the extension of the Pennsylvania deadline to Nov. 6 and order the state to reject any ballots that arrived after election day.

          This is not some constitutional flight of fancy. Justice Samuel Alito has already made clear his view that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has violated the Constitution…He wrote: “The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has issued a decree that squarely alters an important statutory provision enacted by the Pennsylvania Legislature pursuant to its authority under the Constitution of the United States to make rules governing the conduct of elections for federal office.”

          — John Yoo, American legal scholar, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law, University of California, Berkeley

          Oh, by the way:

          Have a lovely evening, everyone. 🙂

      1. The numbers firmly point to the intense improbability of the accuracy of the present Biden lead. The statistical case provides more than enough reasonable suspicion to require hand recounts and immediate investigation into fraudulent activities, including the new damning revelations of on-the-record whistleblowers.

        1. TURNOUT: For Wisconsin overall, the turnout was above 90% of registered voters. Even in a state with same-day registration, such a number seems implausible.

        After all, in Australia, a place where voting is mandatory, and failing to vote is punishable with stiff fines, the total turnout for the most recent election was still only 92%.

        Even more importantly, looking within the Wisconsin vote, the decisive locale for Biden was, unsurprisingly, Milwaukee. Wisconsin’s largest city reported an 84% turnout to secure a 145,916 vote lead there for Biden.

        Consider a comparison to another very similar Midwestern city, Cleveland, OH. Milwaukee has a population of 590,000, 67% of them minorities. Cleveland has 381,000 people with 60% of them minorities.

        But Milwaukee’s 84% turnout dwarfs Cleveland’s more believable 51% turnout rate. Like many of the suspect statistical trends evident from last Tuesday, the abnormal factors favoring Biden seem only present in the key swing states that Biden allegedly won.

        2. OUTPERFORMANCE VS. OBAMA: For example, consider that in key Pennsylvania counties of Chester, Cumberland, and Montgomery, Biden bested the Obama election performances by factors of 1.24-1.43 times. For Montgomery County, Obama won this swing county by 59,000 votes in his 2012 re-election.

        But in 2020, Biden won Montgomery County by a whopping 131,000 votes, more than twice the prior Obama margin.

        Biden’s 2020 total vote in Montgomery is reported at 313,000, crushing Obama’s 233,000 take in 2012 – and population growth does not explain the gains, as the county only grew by 22,000 residents during those eight years.

        Such eye-popping outperformance vs.Obama, in just the right places, naturally raises a lot of suspicion.

        3. BIDEN-ONLY BALLOTS: Trump campaign legal counsel Sidney Powell reports that, nationwide, over 450,000 Biden-only ballots were cast, meaning the voter allegedly selected Biden but then neglected down-ballot candidates, including closely-contested Senate and House races.

        Again, this phenomenon appears far more prominently in battleground states, raising the alarm for manipulation.

        4. ABSENCE OF MAIL-IN VOTE VETTING: Democratic governors clamored for massive amounts of mail-in voting, knowing full well that most states would become overwhelmed and wholly unable to establish the validity and legality of almost all the votes that poured in via mail.

        In the case of Pennsylvania, Governor Wolf made such changes unilaterally, in stark violation of Pennsylvania law and in contradiction of the clear US Constitutional assignment of voting regulatory authority to state legislatures, not governors. Governor Wolf’s election boards clearly just accepted the ballots… en masse, without appropriate vetting.

        By their own admission, the scant 0.03% of rejected ballots represents a refusal rate that is just 1/30th the level of 2016 in Pennsylvania.

        First-time mail-in voters typically see a rejection rate of about 3% historically, or 100 times the rejection rate of Pennsylvania in 2020.

        When neighboring New York state moved to widespread mail-in voting this summer, their election officials rejected 21% of mailed ballots in June, representing a rate 700 times higher than Pennsylvania’s.

        This total lack of filtering or controls raises enormous suspicion regarding a seriously-tainted ballot pool in the Keystone State.

        RIGGED?

        The statistical case, in isolation, does not prove fraud. But the confluence of highly unlikely results does, emphatically, paint of picture of utter improbability.

        Any one of these four factors alone would cast intense doubt upon election results. Put all four together, and the result is a seemingly impossible statistical perfect storm.

        Is it possible?

        Theoretically, sure. Is it probable?

        No. And so, we must commence with a vigorous audit as the future of our republic hangs in the balance.

        1. It only hangs in the balance because, for the first time in the history of our republic, a bunch of sore losers cannot accept that a result predicted by every reputable polling agency and political observer happened pretty much as predicted (if anything, more Republican than predicted).

          1. You’re as confused as ever, I see.

            The result predicted by every one of your “reputable polling agenc[ies] and political observer[s]” was for an increase of 5-15 Democrat House seats and for taking control of the Senate amid a massive “Blue Wave.”

            “Blue Pipe Dream” was more like it. A well-deserved “defund the police / we hate socialists” Red Bloodbath is what the Democrat nutjobs got.

            So, your effort at revising history above was as poor as the crooked suppression polls plus the Democrat results minus the illegal Dem votes which will ultimately be rejected.

            The GOP held the Senate and made huge gains in the House, sweeping in a record number of Republican women into the House. At least 24 Republican women so far will be headed to the House — including at least 13 new members.

            If the Democrats barley hang on to the House they will be lucky, only to get destroyed in 24 months. Crazy Nancy is today fighting to hang on to her deranged speakership.

            None of this was predicted by the pollsters and corporate media that you seem to follow. (Of course, I told you it would happen well before the election.)

            NO, we’re not going to accept illegal votes or an illegitimate president.

            1. From another comment you made Fisty “There will be no “President Biden.””

              Bwah haaaaa haaa haa haaaaa! Is this prediction going to be like your Trump landslide prediction? Yes it will be. President Biden will be inaugurated on January 20, 2021. One Term Trump’s temper tantrum isn’t going to change that. Go ahead and run out the clock on these incompetent legal challenges. That press conference at Four Seasons Total Landscaping next to a dildo shop was the icing on the delicious cake you’re serving me. Serve me more Fisty! More! OMG it is sooooooo DELICIOUS!!!!! Poor Rudy, the election was called for Biden IN THE MIDDLE OF HIS PRESS CONFERENCE. His reaction was mmmmmm so sweet. I’m getting fat from all the delicious treats you people are serving me.

              I’ll let you stew for now because the longer stew simmers the more delicious it gets and believe me your insane rantings are already scrumptious. Come January 20, 2021 the Fisty stew will be so so so good. I’ll check back then for more tasty delicious treats from you Fisty. Once again I have to congratulate you on how right you were. This IS delicious! Thank you thank you thank you OMG thank you!!!!!

              Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey, goodbye #OneTermTrump

        2. All the sophistry in the world won’t change the fact that trump lost.

          to recap:

          trump: “if I win, it’s legitimate. If I lose, it’s fraud.”

          trump supporters: “ok, boss.”

  3. It’s important to note that Parler is specifically marketed as a safe space for right wing nuts and conspiracists. It will undoubtedly go the way of 4chan and others after it becomes clear that it helps incite violence.

    1. That’s a lie.

      Parler markets itself exactly as follows:

      The world’s town square

      Speak freely and express yourself openly, without fear of being “deplatformed” for your views. Engage with real people, not bots. Parler is people and privacy-focused, and gives you the tools you need to curate your Parler experience.

    1. Once the actual presidential election result becomes clear to all, the leftists – unlike the Republicans – will riot and, of course, loot big screen TVs, sneakers, and major appliances, and President Trump, having now just terminated the weak-kneed Secretary of Defense Esper, will invoke the Insurrection Act.

      Expect curfews in the U.S. for awhile in major cities and expect those who defy the curfews to face harsh, possibly terminal consequences.

      The Insurrection Act of 1807 is a United States federal law (10 U.S.C. §§ 251–255; prior to 2016, 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335; amended 2006, 2007) that empowers the President of the United States to deploy U.S. military and federalized National Guard troops within the United States in particular circumstances, such as to suppress civil disorder, insurrection and rebellion.

        1. Then you prefer Trump.

          It’ll all be clearer to pawns like you soon enough who actually won the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. It’s not Joe Biden.

          The termination of Esper is not a random occurrence. You’ll see soon enough.

          1. Where is the evidence that something over 10,000 votes were stolen in each of at least three states? There is no reason to believe that a recount is going to alter the totals by more than a few hundred votes, and the changes are as likely to cut one way as the other.

            You seem to be suggesting that Esper was fired because he refused to carry out a proposed military takeover of the United States under the cover of an Insurrection Act declaration by The President-for-Life. Esper would not be the only one, since a majority of military ballots are going to Biden. They take an oath to support the Constitution, not a God-Emperor.

            1. The evidence will be presented in due time.

              When the final election results show the winner as President Trump, the msm, Biden, DNC, etc. have set up the kindling doused with gasoline by declaring “Biden” the “winner,” as if they had that ability.

              The lit match will be the final election results with legal votes counted and illegal votes tossed that show President Trump is re-elected.

              At that point, Trump, having replaced the weak-kneed Secretary of Defense Esper, will have to invoke the Insurrection Act. Forced to do so by leftist BLM/Antifa riots, looting, etc.

              Expect curfews in the U.S. for awhile in major cities and expect those who defy the curfews to face harsh, possibly terminal consequences.

            1. That is correct. “QAnon” is not involved is gathering the evidence that will put President Trump over 270 electoral votes and into his second term.

            1. All Americans regardless of party affiliation should want the election process to work out. Millions of people have willing given their life so we can have a free and fair elections. Gore/Bush took 38 days to resolve. We should follow Biden’s original advice and be patient and so all legal votes have been counted and verified.

            2. As of about 2:00 EST on Nov. 10, according to the current numbers from the states themselves,

              Biden is leading by 12,000 in Georgia
              15,000 in Arizona
              20,000 in Wisconsin
              36,000 in Nevada
              47,000 in Pennsylvania
              149,000 in Michigan, and
              233,000 in Minnesota.

              The conspiracy theorists insist that there are facts—which only they know and which are utterly hidden from everybody else—that will reverse most, if not all, of those leads. Not only have they not revealed those facts in all the lawsuits the Trumpists have been filing; they have not even cited any evidence of such facts.

              Instead, they are essentially claiming that the six Republican-appointed judges on the Supreme Court of the United States are going to overturn the election without any evidence and anyone who dissents from their decree is “going to face harsh, even terminal consequences” when the President declares martial law to consolidate his grip on power.

              If I said something like that, I would be accused of having a psychotic break with my Trump Derangement Syndrome. But it is the Trump supporters who are saying it, right here, right in front of your eyes.

        2. Regarding “civics books.”

          Insurrection Act

          10 U.S.C. §§ 331-335

          Sec. 331. Federal aid for State governments

          Whenever there is an insurrections in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into Federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection.

          Sec. 332. Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority

          Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.

          Sec. 333. Interference with State and Federal law

          The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it–

          (1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

          (2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

          In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

          Sec. 334. Proclamation to disperse

          Whenever the President considers it necessary to use the militia or the armed forces under this chapter, he shall, by proclamation, immediately order the insurgents or those obstructing the enforcement of the laws to disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes within a limited time.

          Click to access insurrection_act.pdf


          https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title10/subtitleA/part1/chapter13&edition=prelim

          1. What “Lawyer” is describing is a military takeover of the United States on pretextual grounds. Voting against an incumbent president is not insurrection or conspiracy, whatever he may think.

            1. Actually, no. Why are you rather weakly attempting to mischaracterize what I’m describing? I’m sure you have a reason or reasons.

              I am very clearly describing exactly what I wrote already:

              When the final election results show the winner as President Trump, the msm, Biden, DNC, etc. have set up the kindling doused with gasoline by declaring “Biden” the “winner,” as if they had that ability.

              The lit match will be the final election results with legal votes counted and illegal votes tossed that show President Trump is re-elected.

              At that point, Trump, having replaced the weak-kneed Secretary of Defense Esper, will have to invoke the Insurrection Act. Forced to do so by leftist BLM/Antifa riots, looting, etc.

              Expect curfews in the U.S. for awhile in major cities and expect those who defy the curfews to face harsh, possibly terminal consequences.

            2. This is simply not a close election like 2000, which hinged on a few hundred votes in Florida. Biden is leading by at least 12,000 votes in every state where he has a lead. He is leading in states with 306 electoral votes.

              The courts are simply NOT going to reverse leads of that magnitude based on mere allegations of chicanery. If there is evidence of fraud, show it. The burden of proof is on the party challenging the official results. Proof means evidence, and the challengers haven’t presented any.

            3. And what all of these Democrats fail to grasp is that many of the votes that Biden received were in violation of EXISTING state election laws. Those laws were altered within 90 days (in most cases) of the election by Democratic governors, boards of election, Secretary of State, and other executive positions, but NOT by the State Legislatures (many controlled by Republicans) whom opposed such changes and even went to the Supreme Court in some cases (who punted at the time).
              All of these changes are in direct conflict with the Constitution, which specifically gives full plenary power to the Legislators in all matters concerning election laws per state. In effect, that eradicates many of the ballots that were submitted in a bold attempt to hijack the election. The simple fact that they look legitimate does not IN FACT make them so.
              Mix that up with all of the fraudulent ballots, and we shall see how fast the numbers flip…

              Mike drop….

            4. The only significant example of procedures being changed statewide in apparent violation of a statute is Pennsylvania (and their Supreme Court would disagree with that characterization). Only about 6000 ballots were received after the polls closed (all of them postmarked beforehand). The margin in PA is currently 47,000, so Biden still wins by a wide margin if those votes are eliminated.

              I assume the law in other states is much like the rule in Texas that mistakes in voting procedure made by the government are not allowed to invalidate votes cast in good faith. If the government screws up, the remedy cannot reasonably be to disenfranchise thousands of people who relied on the mistake to their detriment.

              The Supreme Court of the United States is not only a court of law. It is a court of equity.

    2. And Twitter can be left for Dementia SlippingAway Joe and his Kneepad Nanny and their accolade swamp dwellers who have to steal an election to get back into power.

      A few of Biden’s first acts, Executive Orders rejoining the Paris Agreement and the WHO? Hey Marrionette Biden, who behind the scenes pulled your strings for that garbage governance. Back to pissing away the taxpayer dollar for Globalism BS, I see. So, all is right in the political world in DC, and it’s what you’d expect from a 47 year career lying plagiarist who never worked a day in his life with the responsibility of signing the FRONT of a paycheck.

  4. Ok dorks, lets get one thing straight. Twitter is a cesspool of idiot, but parler will be FAR WORSE.
    why? because they are marketing to the lowest common Neanderthal.

    “did someone hurt your fweelings baby? come to our house and will let you be a total arse as much as you want, whites only please”

    1. So idiot, what’s your Parler address?

      Actually, you’d skip Twitter and Parler and go for the personals ads in WAPO which is changing their HeadMast tagline from ‘Democracy Dies In Darkness’ to ‘Democracy is Dead’.

      So, let me guess what you might have in your Personals ad. SWJ – Single White Jerk In DC. Only Head Games, Zero Results. Find Your Loser Companion. Fake Profiles to match Fake News. Wanting to Meet Other Like Minded Immature Singles.

      Happy dating!

  5. Zuk kicked this Progressive off of Facebook primarily, I think, for strongly disagreeing with my many followers at the time on the fake Russiagate narrative for which Comey’s report and Clapper subsequently admitted there was no proof. I gather that Russiagate and meddling was concocted by the CIA, NSA, and FBI to weaken bad Donald’s chances of becoming pres. and to favor Hillary for pres. I continued to challenge NeoLib Russiagaters to offer proof but only cited biased spy reports. Physically and psychologically sick Hillary especially embraced it to help obscure, and give excuse for, her embarrassing, deplorable, and unexpected loss to Donald.
    Parler sounds as if it would not retaliate against my Progressive views. I like the name. It must come from “parlare,” Italian for “talk” or “parlor,” a lounge.

    1. The investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election to help Trump get elected unfolded almost completely after Trump became president. That’s one easy way to understand it wasn’t a conspiracy designed to weaken Trump’s chances during the election. If it was, it would have hit the airwaves well before the election, and we’d have been talking about Russia instead of a handful of Hillary’s mishandled emails.

      As we now know, the reports were largely accurate. Trump benefited from Russian efforts to get him elected.

      1. Russiagate promoters played off of the Rightwing Red Scare which is still alive. Russia is not a threat but made to be a threat to prevent loss of armament profits by Pentagon contractors and from the pockets of legislators. I think fake Russiagate was at the cusp, before and after, of bad Donald’s election. The spy state’s, DNC’s, and Hillary’s Russiagate was perpetrated to smear bad Donald in order to help Hillary beat Donald but it failed. The congured-up Russiagate persists. I hope bad Joe does not use it but I know that he will since he has voted YES on all war authorizations appropriations, so he’s like a Rightwinger. People who say that he’s a near Communist or Socialist may also be Russiagaters.

        1. Hillary did not make up the fact of repeated contacts between the Trump Campaign and officials of the Russian Federation. She did not make up the famous meeting in Trump Tower when campaign officials solicited the assistance of The Russian Government in an American election. One might argue whether the contacts constituted a criminal conspiracy. Some prosecutors would have said yes.

          Part I of the Mueller Report concluded, however, that there was not enough admissible evidence from credible witnesses to win a conviction for conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. It did find evidence of Russian interference and obtained indictments against multiple defendants. Those charges are still pending.

          Part 2 of the Report provided an explanation for why there was insufficient evidence of conspiracy. The Trump Campaign in general, and Donald J. Trump in particular, had engaged in a persuasive pattern of obstruction that had blocked access to critical evidence. Justice Department guidelines prohibited the indictment of a sitting President, so the Report just laid out the facts for Congress, which chose to do nothing.

  6. Dingler: Well stated and balanced comment! For a about the fourth time in the past year I can happily agree with your posting and I am understanding better where you’re coming from. Thx.

    1. My politics are simple: Generally Progressive, nearly always for the underdog, and for the oppressed. So is my religion: never Fundamentalist, always unchurched just like the true Jesus.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.