Elon Musk’s bold release of Twitter files on how and why employees blocked the Post’s 2020 bombshell on Hunter Biden’s laptop marks a defining moment in modern American history. The disturbing details of the ignorant revealed that the so-called genius pulling the tech lever is as supernatural as the man behind the curtain in “The Wizard of Oz.”
Both contractile responses are the same: is that all?
In this case, no, not by a long shot. The revelation of Musk must be the start of a nationwide campaign to expose the full picture of the unholy collusion between partisan government censors and Big Tech.
Consider that Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg recently admitted to podcaster Joe Rogan that the FBI warned him against Russia’s disinformation program in the fall of 2020.
“The FBI came up to some people on our team and said, ‘Hey, you know, you have to be on high alert. There was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election. I thought it was, but I was informed that basically a similar dumping was about to take place.”
Zuckerberg said this by explaining why Facebook restricted and in some cases blocked users from sharing The Post’s laptop reports.
Twitter apparently got the same warning, and almost certainly involved former FBI general counsel James Baker, who was involved in the 2016 Trump campaign investigation and now holds a similar position on Twitter. rice field. Unsurprisingly, the released files show that he had no remorse or doubt in prompting the suppression of the Post’s articles.
Additionally, as Intercept reporter Lee Fang detailed and a former Twitter insider confirmed, the FBI held weekly meetings in Silicon Valley with tech folks about cracking down on disinformation. Of course, their definition of disinformation was very broad and included virtually anything that made Joe Biden or a Democrat look bad.
But even knowing all that, it’s still naive to think we know everything. I don’t know where it came from. I also don’t know if the operation is still ongoing.
We know the FBI had Hunter Biden’s laptop for a year before the post revealed its contents. No need to sarcastically wonder if it was because I knew.
Keeping up with Twitter’s censorship of Hunter Biden’s laptop story in the post
It’s entirely possible that other federal agencies were involved in the censorship effort. Fang and his Intercept colleague Ken Klippenstein said in his October report that the Department of Homeland Security is “making a huge effort…to make an impact on technology platforms.”
Investigating this conspiracy to thwart the First Amendment and mislead the public is a bespoke task for a starving young Turk who will lead the new Republican House Majority Commission of Inquiry.
But wait — there’s one more missing piece of the puzzle left: the bellkau of mainstream media.
They also avoided touching the first Hunter’s scoop – except to try to knock it down.
For example, the New York Times waited four days before printing a lazy article that sought to undermine the story, saying some employees in the Post’s newsroom were unsure of its veracity. I’m still shocked that The Times reporter was able to access Hunter Biden’s former partner, Tony Bobrinski, when he co-sponsored Joe Biden for a secret 10% cut. refusing to print that it confirmed the authenticity of an e-mail named after a “big man” who had joined with a Chinese conglomerate.
There are two basic possibilities to explain media collusion. First, it’s often backed up by partisan leaks from the Justice Department, including The Times, Washington Post, and CNN, but was duped by the FBI into thinking the story was a hoax.
Did Big Guy Profit?
Sure, they and other media laptop naysayers have authenticated important content since then, but they’ve left the core question of Joe Biden’s role unexplored in scattered ways.
Did the President of the United States benefit from selling access to him, or did he compromise in deals with foreign powers? No one in big media seems to care.
Another possibility of media collusion is that they may have gone along with the FBI’s cares because they fit the common agenda of defeating Trump and electing Biden.
After all, they were teammates in a similar effort in 2016, and Russia is a hoax trying to elect Hillary Clinton. It failed, but they were determined to succeed this time. So don’t look too closely at Biden.
Whatever the reason, there is certain unholy collusion with three footholds: government, big tech, and big media.
Another unresolved part of that alliance is a secret society of 51 ex-intelligence agents who have signed a letter saying the laptop has “all traces” of Russian disinformation. No one saw the laptop, but their letter became an article grabbed by the media, providing Joe Biden with a lifeline in his upcoming debate with Trump. Some signatories are still defending the letter, and no one has apologized for misleading the public.
Especially not when most media outlets treated Musk’s release in the same way they did the story of the first laptop. they ignored it.
It seems strange, until I wondered if they were afraid the documents would expose their role in suppressing the original story. If these Democratic handmaidens actually had a conscience, I’d call it a guilty conscience, but the moment Trump stepped down the escalator, it went above and beyond all their standards.
Worse yet, the concentration of this collusion is unlike anything our country has ever seen.
Alliance leaders have become the only acceptable providers of voice and enforcement to their opponents. Their domain spans from print to broadcast to social media, and 300 million Americans We aim to determine what we can say and do about everything from race to environment. Their criticisms upset boardrooms, academics, and even athletes.
When they take a unified stance on an issue, it can be difficult to find or hear alternatives. Blocking the news of the event or limiting its spread makes it as if the event never happened.
And, lest we forget their power, the election of Joe Biden as president meant millions of voters knew the Post had exposed deep ties to his son’s corrupt schemes. Please remember that this is because you were not allowed to do so.
Those who did it are not a threat to democracy. They are the destroyers.