From no. 20 but you should really read all of it. The cynic in me expects the goalposts to move and more smear.
20. “Were Twitter a contractor for the FSB… they could not have built a more effective disinformation platform,” Johns Hopkins Professor (and Intel Committee “expert”) Thomas Rid told Politico.
"Were Twitter a contractor for the FSB," the Russian intelligence agency involved in the 2016 campaign to meddle in the US election Rid Said, "They could not have built a more effective disinformation platform."
21. As congress threatened costly legislation, and Twitter began was subject to more bad press fueled by the committees, the company changed its tune about the smallness of its Russia problem.
Republican partisan's probably see it as treason. Democrats partisans pretend it's a "nothingburger." Everyone else who notices is getting despondent which is probably just as bad.
FIRE, Greenwald, Taibbi have stood and continue to stand on principle not partisan and will get relentlessly smeared with insane lies because of it.
edit: sidenote. For me the google search "twitter files taibbi" without quotes returned Tabbi's publication racket on page 4. From there I could get the twitter files separate publication. That seems like a very bad search fail. I wonder why it is like that.
Non of that is incompatible with what I've said though.
Looming legislation and contracting alone are not a problem.
With all this scrutiny there is no evidence of a quid pro quo.
This is what I was getting at above, that there is room in the Twitter files for a chilling effect on speech when it comes to these competing interests, but what you're comparing it to is so far beyond the pale as to be absurd.
Look at this without the vitriol. There's a lot of stuff that looks weird, but it's been heavily investigated and so far no one has found anything deeper.
When you compare that to measurable harm, I think it's right that people take issue
> The government threatening legislation unless a company censors in line with the government's wishes is wrong and a violation of the 1st am.
What is the evidence of that? There was proposed legislation, but where was the evidence of "do this or else". Are you saying that the FBI was conspiring with the legislative branch? What evidence is there of that?
I've conceded the potential for a chilling effect three times now, there is a speech issue, but no evidence of a severity even nearly on par.
Look at the lengths you have to go to to get this point, you go and find sources that allege all the same things I've already described but very angrily and then tell me I'm the one too emotionally invested to see this clearly.
https://twitterfiles.substack.com/p/how-twitter-let-the-inte...
From no. 20 but you should really read all of it. The cynic in me expects the goalposts to move and more smear.
20. “Were Twitter a contractor for the FSB… they could not have built a more effective disinformation platform,” Johns Hopkins Professor (and Intel Committee “expert”) Thomas Rid told Politico.
"Were Twitter a contractor for the FSB," the Russian intelligence agency involved in the 2016 campaign to meddle in the US election Rid Said, "They could not have built a more effective disinformation platform."
21. As congress threatened costly legislation, and Twitter began was subject to more bad press fueled by the committees, the company changed its tune about the smallness of its Russia problem.
Republican partisan's probably see it as treason. Democrats partisans pretend it's a "nothingburger." Everyone else who notices is getting despondent which is probably just as bad.
FIRE, Greenwald, Taibbi have stood and continue to stand on principle not partisan and will get relentlessly smeared with insane lies because of it.
edit: sidenote. For me the google search "twitter files taibbi" without quotes returned Tabbi's publication racket on page 4. From there I could get the twitter files separate publication. That seems like a very bad search fail. I wonder why it is like that.