Jump to content
Utilit99

Twitter adopts 'poison pill' to prevent Elon Musk takeover

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

 

“many” occasions = not all

Thanks.  To be clear, I was looking for an example of a specific request.  Also if possible, and I apologize if this was not clear from context, but a request which benefited Trump vs. those involving "accounts which should be taken down because they were disinformation from "malign foreign influence operations".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

Thanks.  To be clear, I was looking for an example of a specific request.  Also if possible, and I apologize if this was not clear from context, but a request which benefited Trump vs. those involving "accounts which should be taken down because they were disinformation from "malign foreign influence operations".

Haven’t seen those, but that tweet and Taibbi’s tweet about Trump’s White House confirms it happened, unless your argument is that Trump’s White House would request a tweet to be removed that didn’t benefit him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Except the weekly meetings they had with twitter where they warned them of potential hacked disinformation that might be spread out, specifically using social media and specifically about Hunter Biden.  No evidence other than that, besides the emails of them reporting posts about Hunter Biden.  No evidence other than that though, except emails back saying we got it "handled".  No evidence other than that though, except internal documents between Twitter Safety and Security emailing back and forth asking how they are going to justify what they are doing.  No evidence other than that though. Nothing to see here.

Yes, there is evidence they “handled” requests to take down Hunter Biden d1ck pics, that’s about it.

Internal emails are not evidence of government involvement, in fact Taibbi’s thread suggests just the opposite, that the government (including Dems) were pissed they were censoring the NY Post story.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

“Suggested” was the word used in the post I was replying to.

But I disagree.  Warning of a “potential hacking attack involving Hunter Biden” is not necessarily saying they need to censor the next Hunter Biden story that pops up.   And actually, reading the testimony closer, it only states that the “warning” was just about a hacking attack in general and was not specific to Hunter Biden.  There were separate “rumors” about it involving Hunter Biden.  This really seems like a stretch to be calling it “confirmed FBI interference directly with the election.”

Thank you for talking like an actual human being for a change though.

With this level of naivete I would expect that you've given all of your money to every Nigerian prince who has contacted you for help.  :unsure: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Haven’t seen those, but that tweet and Taibbi’s tweet about Trump’s White House confirms it happened, unless your argument is that Trump’s White House would request a tweet to be removed that didn’t benefit him?

"Trump's White House" doesn't necessarily mean it personally benefited him, but fine, let's presume there were one or two.  If you believe that such tweets were to Trump's benefit, you must also believe Taibbi's following less-vague assertion that there was an overwhelming difference in the number of such accommodations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Horseman said:

The bold is wrong, I already quoted the testimony where it was specifically about Hunder Biden.  And please ->  The ONLY Hunter Biden story.  Everyone knows what we're talking about and what they were talking about.  You come across and playing dumb.  

And:

1 - When Twitter labels something as "hacking" it normally comes along with a police statement or other government official that's determined an actual case of hacking occurred.  None of that happened.

2 - Despite #1 - they not only took down the materials, they completely suspended the NY Post's account.  This wasn't Joe Bob from Cincinnati, instead an actual major News Outlet that is in the business of disseminating real and disinformation with credible sources.

3 - They didn't just take the material down from the NYT, they took down Joe Bob and everyone else that was trying to share it, much like Covid which likely will be the nest Twitter files released, they suspended and kicked everyone off twitter who was sharing this information.

This wasn't some random, better watch out for shady stories about Hunter from Russian bots.  This was targeted at verifiable accounts that did more than just take down the "questionable" material - they suspended accounts.   

 

 

Let me slim down the quoted testimony.

5 hours ago, Horseman said:

Yoel Roth testified that in weekly meetings with the FBI he learned "the intelligence community expected that individuals associated with political campaigns would be subject to hacking attacks and that material obtained through those hacking attacks would likely be disseminated over social media platforms, including Twitter.  I also learned in these meetings that there were rumors that a hack-and-leak operation would involve Hunter Biden."

 

So, there was a specific warning about a hacking attack.  And there was “also” a RUMOR that a hack and leak operation would involve Hunter Biden.  I wasn’t there, but that sounds like there were likely various subjects that they were predicting the hack could be about.

No one is denying your points 2 & 3 happened.   Basically what Taibbi and everyone here is doing is this:

1. The government asked Twitter to take down tweets, and “many” times they complied

2.  Twitter took down the NY Post story

3.  Therefore, the government must have told them to take down the NY Post story!  
 

Except we don’t have evidence of that except for some vague warning and rumor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rupert Murdoch openly bought and suppressed stories about Trump that would have damaged him in 2016.  How exactly is what Twitter did any different?  Other than they didn't buy stories to suppress them and they couldn't actually validate the contents of a you know stolen laptop.

It's astounding how intellectually vacuous you stupid cultist are.

And yes Biden did get 81M votes.  60+ failed court cases have upheld this.  If you think differently you're simply either a moron or a cultist.  Oops I'm being redundant there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

"Trump's White House" doesn't necessarily mean it personally benefited him, but fine, let's presume there were one or two.  If you believe that such tweets were to Trump's benefit, you must also believe Taibbi's following less-vague assertion that there was an overwhelming difference in the number of such accommodations.

I’m sure that part is true.  But I guess it’s no big deal if “it’s not widespread” from one of the sides.  

But let’s be honest, wouldn’t it be safe to assume that there likely is more content that legitimately should be removed coming from the “right”?  I use quotation marks because I know most normal conservatives don’t want to be associated with the crazies on twitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fockin complete idiots don’t know what evidence is. No evidence? That’s what’s being thrown out there? Really? No wonder I don’t bother with some of you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I’m sure that part is true.  But I guess it’s no big deal if “it’s not widespread” from one of the sides.  

But let’s be honest, wouldn’t it be safe to assume that there likely is more content that legitimately should be removed coming from the “right”?  I use quotation marks because I know most normal conservatives don’t want to be associated with the crazies on twitter.

To the first point:  there is also a difference between "Can you take that pic down, it makes Melania look fat" and "can you take that tweet down and suspend the user, we're trying to influence the presidential election."  But it seems you want to play the "if it is non-zero from the right then it is equivalent" game.  :( 

To the second point:  my gut reaction is "probably," but keep in mind that the Left defines misinformation.  So... if I wanted to discuss who starred in Juno, Ellen Page or Elliot Page, Twitter and a lot of people would consider me transphobic even though it is a legitimate discussion regarding the recording of history.  Or discuss the origins of Covid back in the day.  Or any other number of topics the thought police are trying to dictate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Let me slim down the quoted testimony.

So, there was a specific warning about a hacking attack.  And there was “also” a RUMOR that a hack and leak operation would involve Hunter Biden.  I wasn’t there, but that sounds like there were likely various subjects that they were predicting the hack could be about.

No one is denying your points 2 & 3 happened.   Basically what Taibbi and everyone here is doing is this:

1. The government asked Twitter to take down tweets, and “many” times they complied

2.  Twitter took down the NY Post story

3.  Therefore, the government must have told them to take down the NY Post story!  
 

Except we don’t have evidence of that except for some vague warning and rumor.

I'd like to introduce you to Occam's Razor.  And why would you claim Taibbi of doing it, he's full on liberal.

There is blood all over the room, the FBI's fingerprints on the murder weapon and your screaming that there wasn't an eye witness.  Meanwhile there are eyewitnesses working at Twitter and the new Chief is proclaiming if this isn't a first amendment violation what is.

You've have to remember one thing:  Back then, when this happened - you were told the laptop was FAKE.  You have to acknowledge that is isn't fake and the FBI knew that at the time.  They were running the same narrative with you that they were with Twitter.  Now we know better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Horseman said:

I'd like to introduce you to Occam's Razor.  And why would you claim Taibbi of doing it, he's full on liberal.

There is blood all over the room, the FBI's fingerprints on the murder weapon and your screaming that there wasn't an eye witness.  Meanwhile there are eyewitnesses working at Twitter and the new Chief is proclaiming if this isn't a first amendment violation what is.

You've have to remember one thing:  Back then, when this happened - you were told the laptop was FAKE.  You have to acknowledge that is isn't fake and the FBI knew that at the time.  They were running the same narrative with you that they were with Twitter.  Now we know better.

No no, the FBI didn't know anything, they just told Twitter that hypothetically there might be some Russia fake news coming, hypothetically about Hunter Biden.  Hypothetically.  The fact that Twitter connected those incredibly distant dots to the Hunter laptop just days later is on Twitter, not the Feds.  :thumbsup: 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FBI lied to us, went out and found 40 others who were willing to sacrifice their honor to corroborate their lie.  This should bother all of us, regardless of who this was done to.

The FBI should be disbanded.  Create a new entity from scratch, one that doe not bend to political will. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FBI is a criminal syndicate who only wants democrats to rule the world and drink the blood of its enemies.

Anyone that voted for Joe Biden should immediately be executed.  There is no other option.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horseman said:

I'd like to introduce you to Occam's Razor.  And why would you claim Taibbi of doing it, he's full on liberal.

You've have to remember one thing:  Back then, when this happened - you were told the laptop was FAKE.  You have to acknowledge that is isn't fake and the FBI knew that at the time.  They were running the same narrative with you that they were with Twitter.  Now we know better.

Taibbi USED to be considered a liberal, then Trump came along and he, like millions of others, went off the deep end.

As to your second point, it's specious. It doesn't really matter what the FBI knew or didn't know about the laptop. They don't comment on ongoing investigations, they weren't the ones claiming it was a fake. 

You should try to post like this more often. You have worthwhile things to say when you're not being the biggest gaping assh0le on a board that harbors many. I appreciate the posters here like Jerry and Tim that aren't being pr1cks.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fnord said:

Taibbi USED to be considered a liberal, then Trump came along and he, like millions of others, went off the deep end.

As to your second point, it's specious. It doesn't really matter what the FBI knew or didn't know about the laptop. They don't comment on ongoing investigations, they weren't the ones claiming it was a fake. 

You should try to post like this more often. You have worthwhile things to say when you're not being the biggest gaping assh0le on a board that harbors many. I appreciate the posters here like Jerry and Tim that aren't being pr1cks.

 

Huh? He wrote a book called “I can’t breathe” about alleged police brutality in the middle of Trumps term. Stop making things up. He has never been on the side of Trump. He has exposed hypocrisy though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fnord said:

Taibbi USED to be considered a liberal, then Trump came along and he, like millions of others, went off the deep end.

As to your second point, it's specious. It doesn't really matter what the FBI knew or didn't know about the laptop. They don't comment on ongoing investigations, they weren't the ones claiming it was a fake. 

You should try to post like this more often. You have worthwhile things to say when you're not being the biggest gaping assh0le on a board that harbors many. I appreciate the posters here like Jerry and Tim that aren't being pr1cks.

 

Ongoing?....wake me up when they are finished.  🤣  

This was foking 2 years ago!  They've had the laptop over 3 years now!   Actually brilliant point by you - FBI has nothing to say about the Hunter Laptop, they've suppressed it from day 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RLLD said:

The FBI lied to us, went out and found 40 others who were willing to sacrifice their honor to corroborate their lie.  This should bother all of us, regardless of who this was done to.

The FBI should be disbanded.  Create a new entity from scratch, one that doe not bend to political will. 

And yet the FBI votes 80% republican.  So weird how Trump's FBI was so in the tank for Biden.

Almost doesn't quite make sense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RLLD said:

The FBI lied to us, went out and found 40 others who were willing to sacrifice their honor to corroborate their lie. 

Totally forgot about that part.   Yeah, what about those guys.   🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Can I play?

So is the left now ok with the government deciding who wins elections and murdering anyone who disagrees?

I am sure you are ok with that

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Raven Fan said:

And yet the FBI votes 80% republican.  So weird how Trump's FBI was so in the tank for Biden.

Almost doesn't quite make sense...

I was not aware of that, thank you for sharing as I do enjoy research and would like to learn more about that factor.

As I previously pointed out, the leadership is the main problem.  Might we know what their tilt is? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shooter McGavin said:

Can I play?

So is the left now ok with the government deciding who wins elections and murdering anyone who disagrees?

Well, you did get banned for saying someone should murder Trump so......yeah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Totally forgot about that part.   Yeah, what about those guys.   🤣

They strand behind the lie, what other choice do they have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s all just another conspiracy theory. That’s what they are pimping. Sad. Like I always say, they aren’t Americans anymore. They just live here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RLLD said:

I was not aware of that, thank you for sharing as I do enjoy research and would like to learn more about that factor.

As I previously pointed out, the leadership is the main problem.  Might we know what their tilt is? 

It's always something.  The FBI worked for Trump and reported to Barr.  To suggest they actively worked against Trump is assinine.  And I know I know you've got a couple of texts between two lovers who hated Trump.  Those don't mean squat when the vast majority of FBI votes exactly the same way most law enforcement does.

Christopher Wray is a lifelong Republican. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Raven Fan said:

It's always something.  The FBI worked for Trump and reported to Barr.  To suggest they actively worked against Trump is assinine.  And I know I know you've got a couple of texts between two lovers who hated Trump.  Those don't mean squat when the vast majority of FBI votes exactly the same way most law enforcement does.

Christopher Wray is a lifelong Republican. 

So in your opinion, the FBI took actions that were in favor of Trump? And there treatment of him was congruent with how they have treated others? Is that how you look at it the FBI and their behaviors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RLLD said:

So in your opinion, the FBI took actions that were in favor of Trump? And there treatment of him was congruent with how they have treated others? Is that how you look at it the FBI and their behaviors?

You gotta let some go once in a while. Even I have learned that. Don’t bother. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

36 Tweets in Twitter files #1

FBI had the laptop a year prior (3 years total now)

FBI met weekly with Twitter and other social media (the FBI had the laptop)

50 Former Intelligence officers - earmarks of Russian disinformation (the FBI had the laptop)

 

But hey, you guys!  Most all the FBI agents I know vote republican so there, ha ha!      :wacko:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Horseman said:

36 Tweets in Twitter files #1

FBI had the laptop a year prior (3 years total now)

FBI met weekly with Twitter and other social media (the FBI had the laptop)

50 Former Intelligence officers - earmarks of Russian disinformation (the FBI had the laptop)

 

But hey, you guys!  Most all the FBI agents I know vote republican so there, ha ha!      :wacko:

 

They grasp and cling to whatever they can. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Fockin complete idiots don’t know what evidence is. No evidence? That’s what’s being thrown out there? Really? No wonder I don’t bother with some of you. 

Take it up with Matt Taibbi - those were his words

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Horseman said:

I'd like to introduce you to Occam's Razor.  And why would you claim Taibbi of doing it, he's full on liberal.

 

Actually I’m sorry, Taibbi didn’t do it himself, as evidenced by the tweet I shared above.  He just crafted the story in a way that that’s the conclusion people would jump to.  HT fell for it hook, line and sinker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

 

“many” occasions = not all

Awesome.  So lots of censorship is ok, as long as it is not 'all'.   This kind of sounds like just be a little bit pregnant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, RLLD said:

So in your opinion, the FBI took actions that were in favor of Trump? And there treatment of him was congruent with how they have treated others? Is that how you look at it the FBI and their behaviors?

We have no idea what the FBI actually did and why.  Maybe their actions were apolitical like they're supposed to be?

The point is, the vast majority of the rank and file AND leadership of the FBI are conservative.  Like most law enforcement.  To assume  they were working to undermine Trump you must suspend reason and common sense. 

Remember when James Comey torpedoed Hilary's campaign with 10 days left WHILE Trump was also under investigation?  Only one of the candidates was publicly outed, and it wasn't Trump. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jonmx said:

Awesome.  So lots of censorship is ok, as long as it is not 'all'.   This kind of sounds like just be a little bit pregnant. 

Taibbi didn’t say it. Irrelevant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jonmx said:

Awesome.  So lots of censorship is ok, as long as it is not 'all'.   This kind of sounds like just be a little bit pregnant. 

Without seeing what the tweets in question are, we don’t know if it was justified or not.  It’s not censorship if they’re just calling attention to tweets that should rightfully be removed.

I’d compare it to digby reporting people for making fun of him.  The mods (mod?) don’t have to do anything about it, but if they feel a banning is justified, they can (even though some other people may have said worse and not been banned).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×