Google Changes Definition of 'Bloodbath' Following Trump Rally

Google was the chief promulgator of the Donald Trump "bloodbath" hoax over the weekend, flooding its search results with articles that deceptively framed the former president's comment. 

Trump predicted that re-electing Joe Biden would stir an economic "bloodbath," while specifically referencing the automotive industry at a rally last weekend.

Yet nearly every headline Google generated on the topic led users to an article skimping over the context, suggesting Trump warned of his plans to provoke a civil war.

Google understands it can no longer lead users to such deceptive headlines. Most Americans know what Trump said by now. Therefore, Google implemented a change. 

A change to its definition of the word "bloodbath," that is. The change occurred sometime between March 17 and March 21.

Take a look:

Someone at Google is determined to deter voters away from Donald Trump, using "bloodbath" as a tool to accomplish that mission. 

Conspiratorial? 

Hardly.

On Monday, the Media Research Center published a study concluding that Google "interfered" in major elections in the United States "41 times over the last 16 years."

As expected, Google's efforts disproportionately favored liberal candidates. 

"Google has utilized its power to help push to electoral victory the most liberal candidates, regardless of party, while targeting their opponents for censorship," found the study.

"From the mouths of Google executives, the tech giant let slip what was never meant to be made public: That Google uses its "great strength and resources and reach to advance its leftist values."

We've warned for well over a year, here at OutKick, that Google poses a far greater threat by way of election interference than any other tech or media platform.

Google accounts for 92 percent of the search engine market share. Over 99% of searchers only look at the first page of Google results, on which the search engine dictates what appears.

Google controls what voters see. Google manipulates the information to which voters have access. Google decides to which stories voters are not privy.  And, now, the meaning of specific words.

Who makes those decisions within Google?

That's part of the fun. We don't know. Google won't say.

The search engine giant does not present a front-facing character, a la Facebook (Mark Zuckerberg), X (Elon Musk), or Amazon (Jeff Bezos).

A faceless tyrant  – or tyrants - was put in place to enforce unilateral policies over the most omnipotent app to ever influence American politics.