{"id":39288,"date":"2022-12-13T06:18:02","date_gmt":"2022-12-13T11:18:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=39288"},"modified":"2022-12-13T06:18:02","modified_gmt":"2022-12-13T11:18:02","slug":"the-twitter-files-the-first-steps-to-the-banning-president-donald-trump","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=39288","title":{"rendered":"The Twitter Files, the first steps to the banning President Donald Trump"},"content":{"rendered":"

Good day all. The Twitter Files are continuing to drop and Part 3 was released Friday, December 9th<\/sup>, by Matt Taibbi. This one went into the \u201cReasons\u201d that led Twitter to ban the Greatest President of the 21st<\/sup> Century, Donald Trump.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

President Trump made massive use of Twitter before and during his term in office. He used Twitter to bypass the Media Elites and get information out to the nation, unfiltered. Occasionally, this got him into a bit of hot water since he tends to say it as it is, and not in a politically correct manner.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

President Trump\u2019s tendency to say things off the cuff, not to mention being a pro-American president set off the powers that be inside Twitter. As we now know, the Twitter managers actively interfered with the information that showed Joe Biden was a crook. When people who voted for Biden saw the information that Twitter buried, they stated that they would not have voted for him.<\/p>\n

With the mess made of the Tainted Election of 2020, and President Trump trying to show that it was a stolen election, the managers decided they wanted to ban him. The January 6th<\/sup> protest was the excuse they used. Here are some of the details from Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n

In “part one” of the third installment, which dates from October 2020-January 6th, Substack writer Matt Taibbi told his followers, “We\u2019ll show you what hasn\u2019t been revealed: the erosion of standards within the company in months before J6, decisions by high-ranking executives to violate their own policies, and more, against the backdrop of ongoing, documented interaction with federal agencies.” <\/b><\/p>\n

“Whatever your opinion on the decision to remove Trump that day, the internal communications at Twitter between January 6th-January 8th have clear historical import. Even Twitter\u2019s employees understood in the moment it was a landmark moment in the annals of speech,” Taibbi wrote on Friday.\u00a0 <\/b><\/p>\n

He then shared a screenshot of a Twitter employee asking, “Is this the first sitting head of state to ever be suspended?” <\/b><\/p>\n

A few things. First, Twitter had standards back then? Second, the banning of President Trump was an historical moment, but not in the way that the Leftists in Twitter thought. To be blunt, it blew up in their faces and led to the rise of alternative platforms, one of which was Parler. The conspiracy to kill Parler has been documented, and although Parler was able to reconstitute, it\u2019s never been the same. It also led to the formation of Trump Social and, in the end, Elon Musk buying Twitter and exposing the abuses by the censorship teams.<\/p>\n

It also showed that their hatred of the Greatest President of the 21st<\/sup> Century was so intense, that they didn\u2019t see the issues it raised. Heads of State of countries actively engaged in terrorism, or massive violations of Human Rights were never banned and many are still in place today.<\/p>\n

Taibbi reported that executives at Twitter “started processing new power” following their decision to ban Trump, indicating they were “prepared to ban future presidents and White Houses \u2013 perhaps even Joe Biden. The \u2018new administration,\u2019 says one exec, \u2018will not be suspended by Twitter unless absolutely necessary.\u2019” <\/b><\/p>\n

in other words, if they showed that they were conservatives, pro-American, anti-globalist and wanting to preserve American sovereignty, then they would be blocked and banned.<\/p>\n

One unnamed executive alleged the “context surrounding” the actions of Trump and his supporters “over the course of the election and frankly last 4+ years” contributed to the ban. <\/b><\/p>\n

“In the end, they looked at a broad picture. But that approach can cut both ways,” Taibbi wrote. “The bulk of the internal debate leading to Trump\u2019s ban took place in those three January days. However, the intellectual framework was laid in the months preceding the Capitol riots.” <\/b><\/p>\n

In other words, since President Trump defeated Obama\u2019s heir apparent, the thoroughly corrupt Felonia von Pantsuit, and then, once in office, began working to keep his promises to Make America Great Again, he needed to be put in his place by the Progressive Deep State elites.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

After alluding to the second installment of the Twitter Files that addressed the shadowbanning of conservatives, Taibbi reported, “As the election approached, senior executives \u2013 perhaps under pressure from federal agencies, with whom they met more as time progressed \u2013 increasingly struggled with rules, and began to speak of ‘vios’ as pretexts to do what they\u2019d likely have done anyway.” <\/b><\/p>\n

The information that federal agencies were working directly with Socialist Media to undermine President Trump is a story all by itself. The people running the agencies, with few exceptions, were career employees and not political appointees. Some of the worst offenders were in the Department of Justice and the FBI. Now a majority of Americans consider the FBI to be a true threat to the nation and want it abolished.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The Fox Story reporting on Part 3 of the Twitter files goes into the details of the internal discussions regarding banning President Trump. Yoel Roth and Vijaya Gadde were two of the biggest haters of President Trump and the \u201cDeplorables\u201d backing him. They were the ones, along with a few others, pushing to find any way possible to \u201cGet Trump!\u201d<\/p>\n

“One particular slack channel offers an unique window into the evolving thinking of top officials in late 2020 and early 2021,” Taibbi reported. “On October 8th, 2020, executives opened a channel called ‘us2020_xfn_enforcement.’ Through J6, this would be home for discussions about election-related removals, especially ones that involved \u2018high-profile\u2019 accounts (often called \u2018VITs\u2019 or \u2018Very Important Tweeters\u2019).” <\/b><\/p>\n

He continued, “There was at least some tension between Safety Operations \u2013 a larger department whose staffers used a more rules-based process for addressing issues like porn, scams, and threats \u2013 and a smaller, more powerful cadre of senior policy execs like Roth and [Twitter’s former trust and policy chief Vijaya] Gadde. The latter group were a high-speed Supreme Court of moderation, issuing content rulings on the fly, often in minutes and based on guesses, gut calls, even Google searches, even in cases involving the President.” <\/b><\/p>\n

Supreme Court? More like Kangaroo court if you ask me.<\/p>\n

“During this time, executives were also clearly liaising with federal enforcement and intelligence agencies about moderation of election-related content. While we\u2019re still at the start of reviewing the #TwitterFiles, we\u2019re finding out more about these interactions every day,” Taibbi added. <\/b><\/p>\n

Taibbi then turned to correspondence involving Twitter’s policy director Nick Pickles with one employee asking him if Twitter should say it “detects \u2018misinfo\u2019 through \u2018ML, human review, and **partnerships with outside experts?*\u2019 adding, “I know that\u2019s been a slippery process\u2026 not sure if you want our public explanation to hang on that.” <\/b><\/p>\n

One of the problems with Twitter, Facebook and other platforms was their suppression of what they called misinformation. Twitter and the rest of Big Tech were quick to call something \u201cMisinformation\u201d and then claiming that \u201cIndependent Fact Checkers\u201d had determine that something was misinformation. It has turned out that most of what these frauds and Fake Checkers were calling misinformation was anything but. Some of it was honest errors, that in a normal situation would have been discussed. Others were factual but went against the current doctrine coming from the Federal Agencies.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Pickles himself is seen asking if Twitter could “just say \u2018partnerships,’ later writing, “e.g. not sure we\u2019d describe the FBI\/DHS as experts.” <\/b><\/p>\n

I certainly wouldn\u2019t, Enemies of the People, a threat to the Constitution, Traitorous Bastards? Quite possibly.<\/p>\n

Taibbi revealed that Roth not only met with the FBI, DHS and the Office of Director of National Intelligence, he apparently discussed the censoring of the Hunter Biden laptop story.\u00a0 <\/b><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“Some of Roth\u2019s later Slacks indicate his weekly confabs with federal law enforcement involved separate meetings. Here, he ghosts the FBI and DHS, respectively, to go first to an \u2018Aspen Institute thing,\u2019 then take a call with Apple,” Taibbi wrote while sharing a screenshot of an exchange.\u00a0 <\/b><\/p>\n

Taibbi shared another message, explaining, “Here, the FBI sends reports about a pair of tweets,” one from Twitter user John Basham claiming “Between 2% and 25% of Ballots by Mail are Being Rejected for Errors.” <\/b><\/p>\n

As we are learning, the mail in ballots were a mess, ripe for fraud and error. The documentary by Dinesh D’Souza, 2000 Mules<\/a>, demonstrates how the Mail In ballots may have engendered massive election fraud by the Democrats. We saw a repeat of the mess in places like Maricopa County during the 2022 midterm elections. (Legal actions are ongoing in this case)<\/p>\n

“The FBI-flagged tweet then got circulated in the enforcement Slack. Twitter cited Politifact to say the first story was ‘proven to be false,’ then noted the second was already deemed \u2018no vio on numerous occasions,\u2019” Taibbi reported. “The group then decides to apply a \u2018Learn how voting is safe and secure\u2019 label because one commenter says, \u2018it\u2019s totally normal to have a 2% error rate.\u2019 Roth then gives the final go-ahead to the process initiated by the FBI.” <\/b><\/p>\n

Right there, they should have pulled back. The FBI has absolutely no business involving itself in the election process other than to insure all those who have the right to vote, can vote without fear or worry, nothing more. Matt Tiabbi also looked for any requests from the Trump campaign, the White House or the GOP. Guess what? He couldn\u2019t find any, and he looked.<\/p>\n

“Examining the entire election enforcement Slack, we didn\u2019t see one reference to moderation requests from the Trump campaign, the Trump White House, or Republicans generally. We looked. They may exist: we were told they do. However, they were absent here,” Taibbi wrote.\u00a0 <\/b><\/p>\n

I really doubt that James Backer and the others in Twitter removed them. They would have used them to show that they were being even handed, not trying to suppress free speech and rig the 2020 election. Another issue was the complete lack of a sense of humor by Progressives in general and that putz Roth.<\/p>\n

Taibbi then turned to an October 2020 tweet made by former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who joked that he voted with his mail-in ballot and then “voted the ballots of my deceased parents and grandparents. They vote just like me!” <\/b><\/p>\n

This is a play on how Chicago tends to have a 100% turnout rate from dead voters and that they all vote Democrat. No one with any sense at all would take that seriously, except for Liberals and they did.<\/p>\n

This led to internal discussions with one Twitter employee saying “I agree it\u2019s a joke\u2026 but he\u2019s also literally admitting in a tweet a crime.” <\/b><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

They finally let this one slide, but noted they don\u2019t make exceptions for jokes or satire. Roth was one of those who wanted it \u201cmoderated\u201d and is on record as refusing to consider satire as a reason to let things through. Eventually, this led to the ban on the Babylon Bee, which then led to Elon Musk first buying a large stake in Twitter, and then buying out Twitter completely. Basically, these idiots slit their own throats, even when Musk started trying to back away from the deal.<\/p>\n

The story continues for quite a bit, but it lays out the background on the ban of President Trump, and their utter hatred of him and everything he stands for. This is laid out in Part 4 of the Twitter Files. I would finish reading the Fox story and also reading the Twitter Files directly on Twitter. Elon Musk is definitely keeping his word to be as transparent as possible regarding what happened to Twitter. Stay tuned!<\/p>\n

Thatisall<\/p>\n\"1\"2\"3\"4\"5 (2<\/strong> votes, average: 5.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n

~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n

\u00a0