Rogan and Taibbi
-
MATT TAIBBI: Yeah, I think that shows you the mentality. They really, genuinely felt that they were impregnable and they don't have anyone to answer to. A normal person doesn't put incriminating things in emails because we all have the expectation that someday it might come out. These folks didn't act that way.
I was especially shocked by an email from a staffer for Adam Schiff, the [Democratic] California Congressman, where they are just outright saying, "We would like you to suspend the accounts of this journalist and anybody who retweets information about this committee." This is a member of Congress, right?
None of these people have legal backgrounds, but they've got lawyers in the office for sure. This is the House Intelligence Committee. You would think that they would have better operational security.
Another moment that was shocking to me was an email from an FBI agent named Elvis Chan in San Francisco to Twitter, and they're setting up this Signal group which is going to include all the top, sort of, censorship executives at all the big companies, and it is a word document that has all the phone numbers of all these important executives. And the subject line reads, "Phone numbers" and the Word document is just called "secret phone numbers." And I'm just thinking, this is how they taught you to do it at Quantico?
Even a journalist can't miss that. Call it something else! That part was amazing.
Isn't it funny how this has gotten so little play in the (other) media? This is government censorship, and a clear 1st amendment violation.
No, it's not funny.
Read it all.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
What if that had been Scalise? Or McConnell?
Think it would have made the MSM?
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
MATT TAIBBI: Yeah, I think that shows you the mentality. They really, genuinely felt that they were impregnable and they don't have anyone to answer to. A normal person doesn't put incriminating things in emails because we all have the expectation that someday it might come out. These folks didn't act that way.
I was especially shocked by an email from a staffer for Adam Schiff, the [Democratic] California Congressman, where they are just outright saying, "We would like you to suspend the accounts of this journalist and anybody who retweets information about this committee." This is a member of Congress, right?
None of these people have legal backgrounds, but they've got lawyers in the office for sure. This is the House Intelligence Committee. You would think that they would have better operational security.
Another moment that was shocking to me was an email from an FBI agent named Elvis Chan in San Francisco to Twitter, and they're setting up this Signal group which is going to include all the top, sort of, censorship executives at all the big companies, and it is a word document that has all the phone numbers of all these important executives. And the subject line reads, "Phone numbers" and the Word document is just called "secret phone numbers." And I'm just thinking, this is how they taught you to do it at Quantico?
Even a journalist can't miss that. Call it something else! That part was amazing.
Isn't it funny how this has gotten so little play in the (other) media? This is government censorship, and a clear 1st amendment violation.
No, it's not funny.
Read it all.
@George-K said in Rogan and Taibbi:
This is government censorship, and a clear 1st amendment violation.
I haven't delved into every case, but I don't think there's a censorship case to be made at all from what I've seen of the twitter files.
As others (such as Matt Yglesias and Nate Silver) have pointed out, about 50% of the 'twitter files' are political actors requesting that moderation decisions be made and Twitter not complying.
Only non-witches get due process.
- Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
-
MATT TAIBBI: Yeah, I think that shows you the mentality. They really, genuinely felt that they were impregnable and they don't have anyone to answer to. A normal person doesn't put incriminating things in emails because we all have the expectation that someday it might come out. These folks didn't act that way.
I was especially shocked by an email from a staffer for Adam Schiff, the [Democratic] California Congressman, where they are just outright saying, "We would like you to suspend the accounts of this journalist and anybody who retweets information about this committee." This is a member of Congress, right?
None of these people have legal backgrounds, but they've got lawyers in the office for sure. This is the House Intelligence Committee. You would think that they would have better operational security.
Another moment that was shocking to me was an email from an FBI agent named Elvis Chan in San Francisco to Twitter, and they're setting up this Signal group which is going to include all the top, sort of, censorship executives at all the big companies, and it is a word document that has all the phone numbers of all these important executives. And the subject line reads, "Phone numbers" and the Word document is just called "secret phone numbers." And I'm just thinking, this is how they taught you to do it at Quantico?
Even a journalist can't miss that. Call it something else! That part was amazing.
Isn't it funny how this has gotten so little play in the (other) media? This is government censorship, and a clear 1st amendment violation.
No, it's not funny.
Read it all.
@George-K said in Rogan and Taibbi:
it is a word document that has all the phone numbers of all these important executives. And the subject line reads, "Phone numbers" and the Word document is just called "secret phone numbers." And I'm just thinking, this is how they taught you to do it at Quantico?
I'm surprised they didn't add "Super Duper" to the document title
-
@George-K said in Rogan and Taibbi:
This is government censorship, and a clear 1st amendment violation.
I haven't delved into every case, but I don't think there's a censorship case to be made at all from what I've seen of the twitter files.
As others (such as Matt Yglesias and Nate Silver) have pointed out, about 50% of the 'twitter files' are political actors requesting that moderation decisions be made and Twitter not complying.
@jon-nyc said in Rogan and Taibbi:
50% of the 'twitter files' are political actors requesting that moderation decisions be made and Twitter not complying.
What's the threshold for government interference, then?
75%?
The Trump administration made similar requests, and the MSM hasn't made much of it that I've seen.
Yup. You haven't seen me defend that, have you?
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@jon-nyc said in Rogan and Taibbi:
50% of the 'twitter files' are political actors requesting that moderation decisions be made and Twitter not complying.
What's the threshold for government interference, then?
75%?
The Trump administration made similar requests, and the MSM hasn't made much of it that I've seen.
Yup. You haven't seen me defend that, have you?
There was a great Advisory Opinions podcast on it. I don't remember the details but I think there basically had to be coercion - a real or perceived threat.
The Twitter Files have shown quite clearly that Twitter was very comfortable saying no to the FBI, to the Trump administration, to the Biden campaign, and to congress critters. They clearly had no concern about retribution.
Only non-witches get due process.
- Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
-
@jon-nyc said in Rogan and Taibbi:
50% of the 'twitter files' are political actors requesting that moderation decisions be made and Twitter not complying.
What's the threshold for government interference, then?
75%?
The Trump administration made similar requests, and the MSM hasn't made much of it that I've seen.
Yup. You haven't seen me defend that, have you?
@George-K said in Rogan and Taibbi:
@jon-nyc said in Rogan and Taibbi:
50% of the 'twitter files' are political actors requesting that moderation decisions be made and Twitter not complying.
What's the threshold for government interference, then?
75%?
My question as well. Jon's argument admits that we're only haggling over price, and the appearance of impropriety is obvious to all.
-
There was a great Advisory Opinions podcast on it. I don't remember the details but I think there basically had to be coercion - a real or perceived threat.
The Twitter Files have shown quite clearly that Twitter was very comfortable saying no to the FBI, to the Trump administration, to the Biden campaign, and to congress critters. They clearly had no concern about retribution.
@jon-nyc said in Rogan and Taibbi:
There was a great Advisory Opinions podcast on it. I don't remember the details but I think there basically had to be coercion - a real or perceived threat.
The Twitter Files have shown quite clearly that Twitter was very comfortable saying no to the FBI, to the Trump administration, to the Biden campaign, and to congress critters. They clearly had no concern about retribution.
I doubt the law is so badly worded as to specify threats only. Obviously the public trust is equally violated if some sort of compensation is given for compliance. No stick, just a carrot.
Then imagine the FBI owing you a favor, and it becomes obvious that this stuff is indefensible.
-
G George K referenced this topic on
