{"id":39318,"date":"2022-12-18T09:06:50","date_gmt":"2022-12-18T14:06:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=39318"},"modified":"2022-12-18T09:15:13","modified_gmt":"2022-12-18T14:15:13","slug":"trump-banned-from-twitter-the-twitter-files-part-4","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=39318","title":{"rendered":"Trump banned from Twitter, The Twitter Files Part 4"},"content":{"rendered":"

Good day all. The data drop from Twitter on the flat out abuse by the previous management of, primarily, conservatives rights of Free Speech continued. Now, part 4 of the twitter files has dropped. This deals with the canceling of the \u201cGreatest President of the 21st<\/sup> Century, Donald Trump by the Moonbats running Twitter.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The Twitter Files have been providing a lot of information, although the format for telling the story isn\u2019t all that great. However, it\u2019s Musk\u2019s Data and his platform, so it\u2019s posted in their tweet format. The latest data drop is by Michael Shellenberger and details what went on regarding the decision to ban a sitting head of state because they didn\u2019t like him. Here are the details from Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n

Twitter CEO Elon Musk and independent journalist Michael Shellenberger have released another installment of internal files from Twitter with this latest batch highlighting the chaos within the company on the day after the January 6 Capitol Hill riot. <\/b><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

“The Removal of Donald Trump: January 7,” author Shellenberger posted Saturday night<\/a> to begin a larger thread. “As the pressure builds, Twitter executives build the case for a permanent ban.” <\/b><\/p>\n

“On Jan 7, senior Twitter execs: – create justifications to ban Trump – seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders – express no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban This #TwitterFiles is reported with @lwoodhouse,” the first post read. <\/b><\/p>\n

One thing the Twitter Files have shown to the world is the utter contempt for the rights of anyone who wasn\u2019t a Progressive snowflake. Part 4 of the Twitter Files, (There just has to be a book coming out of this soon), showed that there were people inside Twitter who were worried about the precedent of banning a sitting head of state. However, the Twitter Files show that pressure from the Hard Left intensified.<\/p>\n

Shellenberger referenced public calls from former First Lady Michelle Obama<\/a> and many other prominent figures calling for Trump’s ban on January 7. <\/b><\/p>\n

The next post stated that Twitter\u2019s CEO at the time, Jack Dorsey,<\/a> was on vacation and delegated much of the responsibility to senior executives, including Former Twitter Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth, who Shellenberger points out were “overwhelmingly progressive.” <\/b><\/p>\n

Dorsey is coming across as either a flat out liar or an incompetent CEO. Personally, I think he was both. As for Michelle Obama? Good manners prevent me from saying what I actually think of that lying piece of treasonous anti-American power mad shrew.<\/p>\n

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

“In 2017, Roth tweeted that there were ‘ACTUAL NAZIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE,'” Shellenberger wrote. “In April 2022, Roth told a colleague that his goal \u2018is to drive change in the world,\u2019 which is why he decided not to become an academic.” <\/b><\/p>\n

Roth is typical of the Progressives. They project what they actually are on those they hate, which is anyone who isn\u2019t a Progressive, Marxist, Socialist or Communist. (Not that there\u2019s any difference between those groups) Roth also has absolutely no idea what a Nazi really is. (And no desire to learn it seems.<\/p>\n

The thread goes on to say that Dorsey sent an email to employees on January 7th telling them they need to “remain consistent” with policies “including the right of users to return to Twitter after temporary suspension.” <\/b><\/p>\n

When it came to the Greatest President of the 21st<\/sup> Century, those polices were tossed into the trash. Shellenberger continued posting the internal back and forth with Roth looking for any reason, including, it appears to me, making one up to ban President Trump. They finally got the OK from Dorsey.<\/p>\n

“Around 11:30 am PT, Roth DMs his colleagues with news that he is excited to share,” Shellenberger tweeted. “‘GUESS WHAT,’ he writes. \u2018Jack just approved repeat offender for civic integrity.\u2019 The new approach would create a system where five violations (“strikes”) would result in permanent suspension.” <\/b><\/p>\n

A colleague then asks Roth if this decision means that Trump can be banned given that Trump had one “remaining strike.” <\/b><\/p>\n

“Does the incitement to violence aspect change that calculus?” The employee wrote to which Roth responded that it does not and Trump continues to have one strike remaining.\u00a0 <\/b><\/p>\n

“This is for everything else,” Roth said. <\/b><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

As we\u2019re finding out, these scum were looking for any reason to ban President Trump. They hated him and what he stands for, Making America Great Again, so much that they were fine with making up special rules to \u201cGet Trump!\u201d<\/p>\n

On January 8, Twitter announces a permanent ban on Trump due to the \u2018risk of further incitement of violence,\u2019” Shellenberger wrote.\u00a0 <\/b><\/p>\n

Which, of course, he didn\u2019t. As we now know, he offered to bring in the National Guard to aid with security and was turned down by Nancy Pelosi.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Shellenberger wrote that the “only” message from a Twitter employee<\/a> expressing serious concern about potential free speech ramifications of banning Trump came from a junior level employee who said it’s a “slippery slope” to make “one-off ad hoc” decisions that “don’t appear rooted in policy.” <\/b><\/p>\n

As I understand it, that one employee was Chinese and knew first hand what censorship does. Mr. Shellenberger continued to provide examples of Twitter employees using the term \u201cOne Off\u201d in their internal discussions.<\/p>\n

“Twitter employees recognize the difference between their own politics & Twitter’s Terms of Service (TOS), but they also engage in complex interpretations of content in order to stamp out prohibited tweets, as a series of exchanges over the “#stopthesteal’ hashtag reveal,” Shellenberger’s thread added. <\/b><\/p>\n

“Roth immediately DMs a colleague to ask that they add \u2018stopthesteal\u2019 & [QAnon conspiracy term] \u2018kraken\u2019 to a blacklist of terms to be deamplified. Roth’s colleague objects that blacklisting \u2018stopthesteal\u2019 risks \u2018deamplifying counterspeech\u2019 that validates the election,” Shellenberger wrote. <\/b><\/p>\n

Up until Elon Musk\u2019s takeover of Twitter, it was common for certain hashtags to not just be suppressed, but the people using them to be banned. #Stopthesteal was one of course, and later on a number of ant-Biden hashtags were suppressed such as #DementiaJoe. We also saw them blocking #groomer.<\/p>\n

“Indeed, notes Roth’s colleague, \u2018a quick search of top stop the steal tweets and they\u2019re counterspeech,'” Shellenberger’s thread continued. “But they quickly come up with a solution: \u2018deamplify accounts with stopthesteal in the name\/profile\u2019 since \u2018those are not affiliated with counterspeech.'”<\/b><\/p>\n

Now there\u2019s a nice bit of \u201cNewspeak there. Counterspeech. That\u2019s right out of George Orwell\u2019s 1984<\/a>. I guess Roth and the other little Fascist Totalitarians never understood that Orwell\u2019s book<\/a> was meant to be a word of warning, not a training manual. Still, there were a few people, a very few it seems, inside Twitter 1.0 that were not all that comfortable with censoring people.<\/p>\n

Shellenberger also highlighted how Twitter employees struggled deciding whether to punish users who posted screenshots of Trump’s deleted January 6th<\/a> tweets with one saying that “we should bounce these tweets with a strike given the screenshot violates the policy” and another saying “they are criticising Trump, so I am bit hesitant with applying strike to this user.” <\/b><\/p>\n

“What if a user dislikes Trump *and* objects to Twitter’s censorship?” The thread continued. “The tweet still gets deleted. But since the *intention* is not to deny the election result, no punishing strike is applied. \u2018if there are instances where the intent is unclear please feel free to raise.\u2019” <\/b><\/p>\n

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

There was a lot of back and forth over banning President Trump between the Sales department and Yoel Roth. It appears that the Sales department had a clue how this would look. Of course, with the little Facists, Communists, Nazis and other closet totalitarians like Roth, it was all about punishing their idea of \u201cWrongthink.\u201d Not satisfied with banning President Trump, Roth and his crew of Censors started looking at any Republican who was not part of the Deep State Uniparty.<\/p>\n

Shellenberger then reported Twitter moderation looked to ban Rep. Matt Gaetz,<\/a> R-Florida, even though it “doesn’t quite fit anywhere (duh).” <\/b><\/p>\n

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

There was one lone voice in the wilderness who tried to pull Roth and the other Fascist Totalitarians back from the edge. He was ignored of course.<\/p>\n

“The evening of January 7, the same junior employee who expressed an \u2018unpopular opinion\u2019 about \u2018ad hoc decisions… that don\u2019t appear rooted in policy,\u2019 speaks up one last time before the end of the day,” Shellenberger reported. <\/b><\/p>\n

Shellenberger said that same employee said the decisions to ban and suspend certain users on a whim could push an idea of Twitter tyranny. He wrote: “My concern is specifically surrounding the unarticulated logic of the decision by FB. That space fills with the idea (conspiracy theory?) that all… internet moguls… sit around like kings casually deciding what people can and cannot see.” <\/b><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

This employee was rumored to be from China and was fully aware of what actual censorship is and how it would look. Instead, Roth and the others decided that they would ban President Trump and anyone else who deviated from the party line, and that line was \u201cTrump bad, Elections fair and honest, Conservatives evil.\u201d<\/p>\n

I doubt that Roth and the others foresaw the day that someone like Elon Musk would come along and outright buy Twitter and then start digging through all the records. On day one, Musk fired Parag Agrawal and Vijaya Gadde, two of the loudest anti Free Speech people in Twitter\u2019s C-level. Yoel Roth resigned. I suspect that he knew that once Elon Musk found out just how bad he was, he too would have been escorted off the premises.<\/p>\n

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

Since I started working on this post, Parts 4, 5 and 6 of the Twitter Files have dropped and it shows just how intertwined the DoJ, FBI, DHS, Twitter and the rest of Big Tech are. With each new revelation, people are seeing just how bad things are, and the Republicans in the House are preparing to really dig into Twitter 1.0 and how the \u201cDeep State\u201d worked to suppress the 1st<\/sup> Amendment and \u201cGet Trump!<\/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