Anonymous wrote:See what happens?

The HB laptop story is Russian disinformation. Literally anyone trying to peddle in it is doing Putin's bidding.

The New York Times and The Washington Post reported that their sources had authenticated a number of emails, including one that was the subject of the New York Post reporting.

22,000 of the on the hard drive were confirmed as authentic in 2022 by two forensic analysts who independently examined the data for The Washington Post.

Anonymous wrote:You all are forgetting what happened. The Wall Street Journal got the laptop leak first, investigated it, and determined that the Bobinski stuff was nothing. After the NY Post nonsense, WSJ wrote that is was nonsense.

FOX News also. Giuliani gave laptop materials to Fox and WSJ and they found nothing newsworthy. NY Post published an article that the reporter asked to have his name removed from.

You all are forgetting what happened. The Wall Street Journal got the laptop leak first, investigated it, and determined that the Bobinski stuff was nothing. After the NY Post nonsense, WSJ wrote that is was nonsense.

See what happens?

The HB laptop story is Russian disinformation. Literally anyone trying to peddle in it is doing Putin's bidding.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:They do no such thing. It is one of the biggest nothingburgers in recent history. Please, in specific detail, list anything that was illegal or even unethical that was revealed.

For example, the White House Press Secretary had her account frozen for tweeting about a New York Post article about Hunters laptop in the month before the 2020 election. I would say that was an abuse of power and an unethical decision by twitter.

Twitter made a decision that the laptop story violated its terms of service. The White House Press Secretary violated the terms of service and had her account frozen until she removed the tweet in question. That is not unethical. To the contrary, it would have been unethical to allow the Press Secretary to violate terms of service to which others were held to account.

But why did the media decide to suppress the laptop story? Did the Biden campaign request they suppress it? Did the media/twitter want Biden to win and suppress/manipulate the facts? Is that OK?

Even Taibbi didn’t find evidence that the Biden campaign was involved in the laptop story decision.

They didn't find John Podesta was involved in the "Russia Dossier" until he admitted in deposition under oath
that the DNC and the Clinton campaign each paid 50 percent of the cost to purchase it.

BTW, not everything is in writing. That's why you investigate and perform discovery.

Do you really believe what you've seen so far is the totality of what went on?

Discovery? You seem confused and are acting like what was released was somehow under adversarial circumstances. That is not the case. Elon Musk has control of all of Twitter's internal correspondence and that's what he handed over to Taibbi.

Maybe he can use neuralink to hack Biden’s brain too.

Maybe the Biden admin FCC should fine Twitter for wrongdoing over suppressing the Biden laptop story and helping Biden get elected. Sounds about right. Companies need to be held accountable.

Accountable for what? What law or regulation did Twitter break?

Let's see if their suppression and selective dissemination of information at Democrat request, is considered to be election interference.

But there was suppression by the request of the Trump White House as well. Is that also election interference?

Also, what is illegal with a private company selectively publishing information? Do you deny that Fox News or any other media outlet is selective? If not, where is my prime time show on Fox? Why is Fox interfering with elections by not broadcasting my opinions?

It depends on what both parties asked to have suppressed. There was enough concern that a democratic house member, a quite partisan one, saw a real problem with this. More will come out today. I don't give a crap about Hunter's penis photos. What I care about is emails, money, working relationships, foreign involvement, etc.

Taibbi didn't present any evidence of the emails, money, working relationships, or foreign involvement being suppressed.

Yet. Again, let’s see what happens this weekend and into next week

Oh, and Bobulinski’s account on Twitter has been suspended a long time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:They do no such thing. It is one of the biggest nothingburgers in recent history. Please, in specific detail, list anything that was illegal or even unethical that was revealed.

For example, the White House Press Secretary had her account frozen for tweeting about a New York Post article about Hunters laptop in the month before the 2020 election. I would say that was an abuse of power and an unethical decision by twitter.

Twitter made a decision that the laptop story violated its terms of service. The White House Press Secretary violated the terms of service and had her account frozen until she removed the tweet in question. That is not unethical. To the contrary, it would have been unethical to allow the Press Secretary to violate terms of service to which others were held to account.

And if you read further there were several discussions within Twitter and even with a democrat politician in regards to the Terms of service violation. They questioned it. The politician even remarked how it violated the first amendment and how would make them look bad.

What Twitter did was unethical.

Twitter has a first amendment right to publish or not publish whatever it wants. Other than that the first amendment is completely irrelevant here.

Twitter users obviously do not according to you.

When it comes out that twitter silenced republicans over democrats will you agree with that too? Twitter is seen as a public square. Now the question is: will it behave as such and obey the constitution? Or it shall be dismantled?

Twitter is allowing nazi's and racists post whatever they want. I don't think they are silencing "republicans"

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:They do no such thing. It is one of the biggest nothingburgers in recent history. Please, in specific detail, list anything that was illegal or even unethical that was revealed.

For example, the White House Press Secretary had her account frozen for tweeting about a New York Post article about Hunters laptop in the month before the 2020 election. I would say that was an abuse of power and an unethical decision by twitter.

Twitter made a decision that the laptop story violated its terms of service. The White House Press Secretary violated the terms of service and had her account frozen until she removed the tweet in question. That is not unethical. To the contrary, it would have been unethical to allow the Press Secretary to violate terms of service to which others were held to account.

But why did the media decide to suppress the laptop story? Did the Biden campaign request they suppress it? Did the media/twitter want Biden to win and suppress/manipulate the facts? Is that OK?

Even Taibbi didn’t find evidence that the Biden campaign was involved in the laptop story decision.

They didn't find John Podesta was involved in the "Russia Dossier" until he admitted in deposition under oath
that the DNC and the Clinton campaign each paid 50 percent of the cost to purchase it.

BTW, not everything is in writing. That's why you investigate and perform discovery.

Do you really believe what you've seen so far is the totality of what went on?

Discovery? You seem confused and are acting like what was released was somehow under adversarial circumstances. That is not the case. Elon Musk has control of all of Twitter's internal correspondence and that's what he handed over to Taibbi.

Maybe he can use neuralink to hack Biden’s brain too.

Maybe the Biden admin FCC should fine Twitter for wrongdoing over suppressing the Biden laptop story and helping Biden get elected. Sounds about right. Companies need to be held accountable.

Accountable for what? What law or regulation did Twitter break?

Let's see if their suppression and selective dissemination of information at Democrat request, is considered to be election interference.

But there was suppression by the request of the Trump White House as well. Is that also election interference?

Also, what is illegal with a private company selectively publishing information? Do you deny that Fox News or any other media outlet is selective? If not, where is my prime time show on Fox? Why is Fox interfering with elections by not broadcasting my opinions?

It depends on what both parties asked to have suppressed. There was enough concern that a democratic house member, a quite partisan one, saw a real problem with this. More will come out today. I don't give a crap about Hunter's penis photos. What I care about is emails, money, working relationships, foreign involvement, etc.

Taibbi didn't present any evidence of the emails, money, working relationships, or foreign involvement being suppressed.

Oh, and here's a Newsweek article:

https://www.newsweek.com/tony-bobulinskis-emails-texts-corroborate-accounts-hunter-biden-china-deals-wsj-editorial-page-1541536

What I am saying is that we have seen no evidence that Twitter suppressed those things, let alone at the Biden campaign's request.

We have seen evidence that Twitter blocked the New York Post article based on Twitter's own evaluation that the article violated Twitter's TOS. We have seen that the DNC intervened to get Hunter's pics removed. That's it.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:They do no such thing. It is one of the biggest nothingburgers in recent history. Please, in specific detail, list anything that was illegal or even unethical that was revealed.

For example, the White House Press Secretary had her account frozen for tweeting about a New York Post article about Hunters laptop in the month before the 2020 election. I would say that was an abuse of power and an unethical decision by twitter.

Twitter made a decision that the laptop story violated its terms of service. The White House Press Secretary violated the terms of service and had her account frozen until she removed the tweet in question. That is not unethical. To the contrary, it would have been unethical to allow the Press Secretary to violate terms of service to which others were held to account.

But why did the media decide to suppress the laptop story? Did the Biden campaign request they suppress it? Did the media/twitter want Biden to win and suppress/manipulate the facts? Is that OK?

Even Taibbi didn’t find evidence that the Biden campaign was involved in the laptop story decision.

They didn't find John Podesta was involved in the "Russia Dossier" until he admitted in deposition under oath
that the DNC and the Clinton campaign each paid 50 percent of the cost to purchase it.

BTW, not everything is in writing. That's why you investigate and perform discovery.

Do you really believe what you've seen so far is the totality of what went on?

Discovery? You seem confused and are acting like what was released was somehow under adversarial circumstances. That is not the case. Elon Musk has control of all of Twitter's internal correspondence and that's what he handed over to Taibbi.

Maybe he can use neuralink to hack Biden’s brain too.

Maybe the Biden admin FCC should fine Twitter for wrongdoing over suppressing the Biden laptop story and helping Biden get elected. Sounds about right. Companies need to be held accountable.

Accountable for what? What law or regulation did Twitter break?

Let's see if their suppression and selective dissemination of information at Democrat request, is considered to be election interference.

But there was suppression by the request of the Trump White House as well. Is that also election interference?

Also, what is illegal with a private company selectively publishing information? Do you deny that Fox News or any other media outlet is selective? If not, where is my prime time show on Fox? Why is Fox interfering with elections by not broadcasting my opinions?

It depends on what both parties asked to have suppressed. There was enough concern that a democratic house member, a quite partisan one, saw a real problem with this. More will come out today. I don't give a crap about Hunter's penis photos. What I care about is emails, money, working relationships, foreign involvement, etc.

Taibbi didn't present any evidence of the emails, money, working relationships, or foreign involvement being suppressed.

Oh, and here's a Newsweek article:

https://www.newsweek.com/tony-bobulinskis-emails-texts-corroborate-accounts-hunter-biden-china-deals-wsj-editorial-page-1541536

jsteele wrote:They do no such thing. It is one of the biggest nothingburgers in recent history. Please, in specific detail, list anything that was illegal or even unethical that was revealed.

Of course this is called a “nothingburger” on a left leaning website but it’s admin. Even Jack Dorsey admits this was a mistake. This plus the collusion of Twitter and Facebook to collude with the admin of the previous president and this one to suppress Covid information are horrible.

But a LWNJ is never going to admit this is an issue.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:They do no such thing. It is one of the biggest nothingburgers in recent history. Please, in specific detail, list anything that was illegal or even unethical that was revealed.

For example, the White House Press Secretary had her account frozen for tweeting about a New York Post article about Hunters laptop in the month before the 2020 election. I would say that was an abuse of power and an unethical decision by twitter.

Twitter made a decision that the laptop story violated its terms of service. The White House Press Secretary violated the terms of service and had her account frozen until she removed the tweet in question. That is not unethical. To the contrary, it would have been unethical to allow the Press Secretary to violate terms of service to which others were held to account.

But why did the media decide to suppress the laptop story? Did the Biden campaign request they suppress it? Did the media/twitter want Biden to win and suppress/manipulate the facts? Is that OK?

Based on the internal correspondence that was published, Twitter made the decision based on its own terms of service and its belief that the Post article was based on hacked or stolen content. The correspondence does not detail how Twitter arrived at that conclusion, nor does the correspondence show any effort by the Biden campaign to block the Post story.

And rightfully, Khanna called them out on it, called it a violation of the Bill of Rights.

Khanna did do that and I appreciate his commitment to free speech. However, the First Amendment has nothing to do with this situation and is a red herring. A private company does not have to comply with the First Amendment.

No they do not...unless they follow the dictates of the Federal Government, which they did.

The DNC and the Biden campaign are not and were not the Federal Government. The only dictates that might be said to come from the Federal Government came from the Trump White House.

It doesn't matter in this case. Biden isn't the 'My Pillow' guy. Biden was the official DNC party candidate for President, and the DNC takes money from the people. I'm hoping the DNC and Biden campaign didn't actively work with Twitter to suppress information with the purpose of influencing an election. That would be really bad.

The only demonstrated interference by the DNC was to get pictures of Hunter's penis removed. Does that trouble you?

Nope. Again, we only know what was released yesterday. There will be more exposed (pun intended) and we'll see if there are any issues with that. I'm willing to wait and see, rather than get defensive. Are you?

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:They do no such thing. It is one of the biggest nothingburgers in recent history. Please, in specific detail, list anything that was illegal or even unethical that was revealed.

For example, the White House Press Secretary had her account frozen for tweeting about a New York Post article about Hunters laptop in the month before the 2020 election. I would say that was an abuse of power and an unethical decision by twitter.

Twitter made a decision that the laptop story violated its terms of service. The White House Press Secretary violated the terms of service and had her account frozen until she removed the tweet in question. That is not unethical. To the contrary, it would have been unethical to allow the Press Secretary to violate terms of service to which others were held to account.

But why did the media decide to suppress the laptop story? Did the Biden campaign request they suppress it? Did the media/twitter want Biden to win and suppress/manipulate the facts? Is that OK?

Even Taibbi didn’t find evidence that the Biden campaign was involved in the laptop story decision.

They didn't find John Podesta was involved in the "Russia Dossier" until he admitted in deposition under oath
that the DNC and the Clinton campaign each paid 50 percent of the cost to purchase it.

BTW, not everything is in writing. That's why you investigate and perform discovery.

Do you really believe what you've seen so far is the totality of what went on?

Discovery? You seem confused and are acting like what was released was somehow under adversarial circumstances. That is not the case. Elon Musk has control of all of Twitter's internal correspondence and that's what he handed over to Taibbi.

Maybe he can use neuralink to hack Biden’s brain too.

Maybe the Biden admin FCC should fine Twitter for wrongdoing over suppressing the Biden laptop story and helping Biden get elected. Sounds about right. Companies need to be held accountable.

Accountable for what? What law or regulation did Twitter break?

Let's see if their suppression and selective dissemination of information at Democrat request, is considered to be election interference.

But there was suppression by the request of the Trump White House as well. Is that also election interference?

Also, what is illegal with a private company selectively publishing information? Do you deny that Fox News or any other media outlet is selective? If not, where is my prime time show on Fox? Why is Fox interfering with elections by not broadcasting my opinions?

It depends on what both parties asked to have suppressed. There was enough concern that a democratic house member, a quite partisan one, saw a real problem with this. More will come out today. I don't give a crap about Hunter's penis photos. What I care about is emails, money, working relationships, foreign involvement, etc.

Taibbi didn't present any evidence of the emails, money, working relationships, or foreign involvement being suppressed.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:They do no such thing. It is one of the biggest nothingburgers in recent history. Please, in specific detail, list anything that was illegal or even unethical that was revealed.

For example, the White House Press Secretary had her account frozen for tweeting about a New York Post article about Hunters laptop in the month before the 2020 election. I would say that was an abuse of power and an unethical decision by twitter.

Twitter made a decision that the laptop story violated its terms of service. The White House Press Secretary violated the terms of service and had her account frozen until she removed the tweet in question. That is not unethical. To the contrary, it would have been unethical to allow the Press Secretary to violate terms of service to which others were held to account.

But why did the media decide to suppress the laptop story? Did the Biden campaign request they suppress it? Did the media/twitter want Biden to win and suppress/manipulate the facts? Is that OK?

Based on the internal correspondence that was published, Twitter made the decision based on its own terms of service and its belief that the Post article was based on hacked or stolen content. The correspondence does not detail how Twitter arrived at that conclusion, nor does the correspondence show any effort by the Biden campaign to block the Post story.

And rightfully, Khanna called them out on it, called it a violation of the Bill of Rights.

Khanna did do that and I appreciate his commitment to free speech. However, the First Amendment has nothing to do with this situation and is a red herring. A private company does not have to comply with the First Amendment.

No they do not...unless they follow the dictates of the Federal Government, which they did.

The DNC and the Biden campaign are not and were not the Federal Government. The only dictates that might be said to come from the Federal Government came from the Trump White House.

It doesn't matter in this case. Biden isn't the 'My Pillow' guy. Biden was the official DNC party candidate for President, and the DNC takes money from the people. I'm hoping the DNC and Biden campaign didn't actively work with Twitter to suppress information with the purpose of influencing an election. That would be really bad.

The only demonstrated interference by the DNC was to get pictures of Hunter's penis removed. Does that trouble you?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:They do no such thing. It is one of the biggest nothingburgers in recent history. Please, in specific detail, list anything that was illegal or even unethical that was revealed.

For example, the White House Press Secretary had her account frozen for tweeting about a New York Post article about Hunters laptop in the month before the 2020 election. I would say that was an abuse of power and an unethical decision by twitter.

Twitter made a decision that the laptop story violated its terms of service. The White House Press Secretary violated the terms of service and had her account frozen until she removed the tweet in question. That is not unethical. To the contrary, it would have been unethical to allow the Press Secretary to violate terms of service to which others were held to account.

But why did the media decide to suppress the laptop story? Did the Biden campaign request they suppress it? Did the media/twitter want Biden to win and suppress/manipulate the facts? Is that OK?

Even Taibbi didn’t find evidence that the Biden campaign was involved in the laptop story decision.

They didn't find John Podesta was involved in the "Russia Dossier" until he admitted in deposition under oath
that the DNC and the Clinton campaign each paid 50 percent of the cost to purchase it.

BTW, not everything is in writing. That's why you investigate and perform discovery.

Do you really believe what you've seen so far is the totality of what went on?

Discovery? You seem confused and are acting like what was released was somehow under adversarial circumstances. That is not the case. Elon Musk has control of all of Twitter's internal correspondence and that's what he handed over to Taibbi.

Maybe he can use neuralink to hack Biden’s brain too.

Maybe the Biden admin FCC should fine Twitter for wrongdoing over suppressing the Biden laptop story and helping Biden get elected. Sounds about right. Companies need to be held accountable.

Accountable for what? What law or regulation did Twitter break?

Let's see if their suppression and selective dissemination of information at Democrat request, is considered to be election interference.

But there was suppression by the request of the Trump White House as well. Is that also election interference?

Also, what is illegal with a private company selectively publishing information? Do you deny that Fox News or any other media outlet is selective? If not, where is my prime time show on Fox? Why is Fox interfering with elections by not broadcasting my opinions?

It depends on what both parties asked to have suppressed. There was enough concern that a democratic house member, a quite partisan one, saw a real problem with this. More will come out today. I don't give a crap about Hunter's penis photos. What I care about is emails, money, working relationships, foreign involvement, etc.

There has been a specific allegation about Hunter involving illegal activity. I don't want to amplify that allegation by repeating it, but it is an allegation that is known to be false. I will remove any post that refers to that specific allegation. If you see your posts disappearing, consider what you posted in order to understand why. The allegation does not involve bribes or money, etc, but related to porn.