‘Biden Team’ Requested Twitter Scrub Scandalous Hunter Biden Info Days before 2020 Election

DaisyDay said:

Are you unaware that Biden was not government in 2020?

Click to expand...

This is why I'd bet on whatever Joe's team did being legal.

Those on the government though? Maybe not.

essentialsaltes said:

Importantly this was not government, it was the Biden campaign.

Click to expand...

Sure...

Also...exactly what Trump was accused of doing with Russia.

Ana the Ist said:

Definitely unethical. Legalities are tricky...I would bet on legal.




Right but it's not quite so simple.



Yeah....they did....and Facebook and Google.


They threatened them with significant regulatory oversight if they didn't play ball.

Click to expand...

Links please.

Ana the Ist said:

Definitely unethical. Legalities are tricky...I would bet on legal.

Click to expand...

Is it really unethical for someone to request that nude photos of a family member posted without their consent be taken down? This isn't a case of exercising undue influence - the posts violated Twitter's policies.

stevil said:

Links please.

Click to expand...

Of?

RocksInMyHead said:

Is it really unethical for someone to request that nude photos of a family member posted without their consent be taken down? This isn't a case of exercising undue influence - the posts violated Twitter's policies.

Click to expand...

Yes.

I'm sorry....but yes. Perhaps a source could require censorship for the nudity...but burying the story is inexcusable.

Ana the Ist said:

They threatened them with significant regulatory oversight if they didn't play ball.

Click to expand...

Links please

stevil said:

Links please

Click to expand...

How many do you want? There's tons of examples. Here's one from both sides....Republicans arguing for transparency and fairness, Democrats arguing for control of information.


There's been a variety of executives, ceos, and whistleblowers either volunteering or mandated to testify or "speak" before congress. These are often involving regulations.

And I'm not saying that regulations aren't needed. Perhaps some are, but nothing I've seen from the left looks even remotely constitutional.

Ana the Ist said:

How many do you want? There's tons of examples. Here's one from both sides....Republicans arguing for transparency and fairness, Democrats arguing for control of information.

Click to expand...

Just one would be sufficient.

You said that Government threatened Twitter and Facebook and Google.
I haven't seen any reports of government threatening Twitter, Facebook or Google with regards to removing Stolen Election or Hunter Biden Laptop articles. I did a search and could not find anything.
So I asked you to provide a link to support this claim.

Ana the Ist said:

Ted Cruz threatens to regulate Facebook, Google and Twitter over charges of anti-conservative bias

Republican lawmakers led by Ted Cruz accused Facebook, Google and Twitter of censoring conservatives and threatened regulation.

www.usatoday.com

Click to expand...

Your link is somewhat interesting. It is about the Republican Ted Cruz threatening to regulate them.
So, ok, yeah here is a threat by government to those organisations, but the context is the total opposite of what we have been talking about so far. Here we have Republicans rather then Democrats making threats (OK, still govt though) but the threats aren't trying to coerce them to suppress stuff, but trying to get them not moderate (especially right wing topics).
I agree this is pretty bad what Ted Cruz is trying to do here. Trying to create BIG government and trying to interfere in the freedom of the private enterprise.

Ted Cruz is accusing Twitter, Facebook and Google of being biased and moderating right wing topics but he provides no evidence, and the articles shows no evidence of such. Actually the article clearly calls this lack of evidence out.

The article also says "Conservatives have offered no evidence of systematic efforts to suppress political speech."

So do you have any links which show evidence of govt interferring in these companies to suppress right wing comments?

stevil said:

Sure, and so the need for laws and ethics and such. But in the USA system there is very little to halt a corrupt politician who has a significantly sized totally loyal base.

I like the british system better, where the ruling party can and sometimes do, cast a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister and simply remove them when they are rogue and caught out or being rouge. This happens when a party wants to protect the reputation and integrity of the party, to show the people that a corrupt leader is not tolerated.

Click to expand...

With regards to the concept of government entities getting private sector to act as proxies to do things they're not allowed to do themselves, we technically do already have some case law that would apply


But, admittedly, it's far from decisive, and leaves a lot of "murky" territory.

stevil said:

Just one would be sufficient.

You said that Government threatened Twitter and Facebook and Google.
I haven't seen any reports of government threatening Twitter, Facebook or Google with regards to removing Stolen Election or Hunter Biden Laptop articles. I did a search and could not find anything.
So I asked you to provide a link to support this claim.


Your link is somewhat interesting. It is about the Republican Ted Cruz threatening to regulate them.
So, ok, yeah here is a threat by government to those organisations, but the context is the total opposite of what we have been talking about so far. Here we have Republicans rather then Democrats making threats (OK, still govt though) but the threats aren't trying to coerce them to suppress stuff, but trying to get them not moderate (especially right wing topics).
I agree this is pretty bad what Ted Cruz is trying to do here. Trying to create BIG government and trying to interfere in the freedom of the private enterprise.

Ted Cruz is accusing Twitter, Facebook and Google of being biased and moderating right wing topics but he provides no evidence, and the articles shows no evidence of such. Actually the article clearly calls this lack of evidence out.

The article also says "Conservatives have offered no evidence of systematic efforts to suppress political speech."

So do you have any links which show evidence of govt interferring in these companies to suppress right wing comments?

Click to expand...

Just trying to be fair to show that it's not only coming from the left. Did you miss this part?

Sen. Mazie Hirono, a Democrat from Hawaii, said Wednesday that Congress should increase oversight of the major tech companies over the rise of hate speech and disinformation but not over allegations of anti-conservative bias, "which have been disproven time and time again."

That a US Democratic Senator saying that the Government should increase its "oversight" over hate speech and disinformation.


I pointed out these tech companies are being threatened with regulations....what did you imagine that looked like ?

stevil said:

Just one would be sufficient.

You said that Government threatened Twitter and Facebook and Google.
I haven't seen any reports of government threatening Twitter, Facebook or Google with regards to removing Stolen Election or Hunter Biden Laptop articles. I did a search and could not find anything.
So I asked you to provide a link to support this claim.


Your link is somewhat interesting. It is about the Republican Ted Cruz threatening to regulate them.
So, ok, yeah here is a threat by government to those organisations, but the context is the total opposite of what we have been talking about so far. Here we have Republicans rather then Democrats making threats (OK, still govt though) but the threats aren't trying to coerce them to suppress stuff, but trying to get them not moderate (especially right wing topics).
I agree this is pretty bad what Ted Cruz is trying to do here. Trying to create BIG government and trying to interfere in the freedom of the private enterprise.

Ted Cruz is accusing Twitter, Facebook and Google of being biased and moderating right wing topics but he provides no evidence, and the articles shows no evidence of such. Actually the article clearly calls this lack of evidence out.

The article also says "Conservatives have offered no evidence of systematic efforts to suppress political speech."

So do you have any links which show evidence of govt interferring in these companies to suppress right wing comments?

Click to expand...

You want another one....here you go?

Ana the Ist said:

You want another one....here you go?

Democrats Want To Hold Social Media Companies Responsible For Health Misinformation

Democratic senators have introduced a bill that would hold Facebook, YouTube and other social media companies responsible if they promote harmful health claims on their platforms.

www.npr.org

Click to expand...

But still, this isn't an example of the government threatening any of these platforms to remove certain specific content.
Instead this is an attempt of govt attempting to legislate directly against misinformation of a deadly pandemic.

It is the government's job to legislate and to create a safe society.
There are no threats here, no revenge acts.
Nothing like what DeSantis did to Disney.

You have not yet provided a single example backing up your claim that government threatened these three platforms to remove either Hunter Biden laptop posts or stolen election posts.

Ana the Ist said:

Yes.

I'm sorry....but yes. Perhaps a source could require censorship for the nudity...but burying the story is inexcusable.

Click to expand...

The article in the OP states that there were a total of 5 posts that the Biden campaign asked to have removed - all of which contained nude photos of Hunter Biden. The DNC requested a further two - at least one of which was a very poorly censored nude photo of Hunter Biden (the article doesn't provide the content of the second). Twitter's rules forbid the posting of nude photos of an individual without their consent, so therefore it was not out of line to request their removal.

And requesting the removal of seven posts does not constitute "burying the story". Based on the information provided in the article, it appears that the decision to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story more broadly was made by a few top Twitter execs (though not the CEO, Jack Dorsey), initially based on the policy forbidding the posting of hacked materials. There's no indication that the Biden campaign, the DNC, or any government entity was part of that decision-making process.

stevil said:

But still, this isn't an example of the government threatening any of these platforms to remove certain specific content.

Click to expand...

Right....that would be illegal. The threat is they will be classified as a certain type of media and then regulated.


Democrats are constantly harping about controlling speech and "misinformation". So when they go send a couple of FBI agents to the tech companies and say "hey there's going to be some Russian misinformation we don't want influencing the election "

The tech companies would rather just pass the buck and do what they say to avoid that future regulation.

stevil said:

Instead this is an attempt of govt attempting to legislate directly against misinformation of a deadly pandemic.

Click to expand...

Which is hilarious because it turned out they were also spreading misinformation.

stevil said:

It is the government's job to legislate and to create a safe society.

Click to expand...

Right and the limit on that is your human rights. Foremost of which isthe ability to express yourself freely. All rights have limits but anyone seeking to control that is a tyrant who deserves the harshest penalty.

stevil said:

There are no threats here, no revenge acts.
Nothing like what DeSantis did to Disney.

Click to expand...

Again, that would be illegal...but I'd hold your tongue on that. Elon has Twitter now so if he feels like revealing any crimes, he can, and he might if they try to threaten him.

stevil said:

You have not yet provided a single example backing up your claim that government threatened these three platforms to remove either Hunter Biden laptop posts or stolen election posts.

Click to expand...

It's an implied threat. I wasn't actually thinking about Hunter Biden or anything specific.


If you want to pretend that the obvious isn't happening....well that seems pretty on brand for Australians. How many cases did it take for them to strip you guys of your dignity and humanity and shove you into quarantine camps? 9?

stevil said:

But still, this isn't an example of the government threatening any of these platforms to remove certain specific content.

Click to expand...

Right....that would be illegal. The threat is they will be classified as a certain type of media and then regulated.


Democrats are constantly harping about controlling speech and "misinformation". So when they go send a couple of FBI agents to the tech companies and say "hey there's going to be some Russian misinformation we don't want influencing the election "

The tech companies would rather just pass the buck and do what they say to avoid that future regulation.

stevil said:

Instead this is an attempt of govt attempting to legislate directly against misinformation of a deadly pandemic.

Click to expand...

Which is hilarious because it turned out they were also spreading misinformation.

stevil said:

It is the government's job to legislate and to create a safe society.

Click to expand...

Right and the limit on that is your human rights. Foremost of which isthe ability to express yourself freely. All rights have limits but anyone seeking to control that is a tyrant who deserves the harshest penalty.

stevil said:

There are no threats here, no revenge acts.
Nothing like what DeSantis did to Disney.

Click to expand...

Again, that would be illegal...but I'd hold your tongue on that. Elon has Twitter now so if he feels like revealing any crimes, he can, and he might if they try to threaten him.

stevil said:

You have not yet provided a single example backing up your claim that government threatened these three platforms to remove either Hunter Biden laptop posts or stolen election posts.

Click to expand...

It's an implied threat. I wasn't actually thinking about Hunter Biden or anything specific.


If you want to pretend that the obvious isn't happening....well that seems pretty on brand for Australians. How many cases did it take for them to strip you guys of your dignity and humanity and shove you into quarantine camps? 9?

Ana the Ist said:

The threat is they will be classified as a certain type of media and then regulated.

Click to expand...

That's not a threat. If govt feel the need to regulate then they go through the government processes required to do such a thing.
But, if govt went to Twitter and said "remove this Biden hunter laptop post or we are going to then heavily regulate your business" then that would be a threat, and it would be in the public's best interest to know about that.
But, this didn't happen. At least, no evidence has yet been presented of a threat like this happening.

Ana the Ist said:

Democrats are constantly harping about controlling speech and "misinformation". So when they go send a couple of FBI agents to the tech companies and say "hey there's going to be some Russian misinformation we don't want influencing the election "

Click to expand...

Interesting story, but this didn't happen.
The Democrats didn't send the FBI to warn tech companies about Russian misinformation.
The Republicans controlled the government, the DoJ, and picked the Boss of the FBI (having fired the previous FBI director).
There is no evidence at all of Democrats controlling the FBI and directing the FBI to warn tech companies. This claim is just madeup nonsense.

Ana the Ist said:

Right and the limit on that is your human rights. Foremost of which isthe ability to express yourself freely. All rights have limits but anyone seeking to control that is a tyrant who deserves the harshest penalty.

Click to expand...

Social Media platforms are not covered by the 1st amendment. They don't have to give free speech to their users.
They can and do choose to moderate. And often this comes down to moderating away hate speech, and messages that may lead to violence and misinformation that may lead to unnecessary deaths (such as misinformation during a pandemic)
It's their choice. They can do as they please.

Ana the Ist said:

Again, that would be illegal...but I'd hold your tongue on that. Elon has Twitter now so if he feels like revealing any crimes, he can, and he might if they try to threaten him.

Click to expand...

Noone is threatening Elon. If he has evidence of crimes, he should publish them or better yet, go to the authorities.
What he has published so far about the Hunter Biden laptop, does not show that the FBI told them to suppress articles about the laptop, does not show that the Democrats pressured them to suppress such articles.

All it shows is that they were made aware, around the time, by the FBI that some Russian disinformation was going around but they were not told what the topic of that disinformation was.
Twitter themselves decided that the Hunter Laptop story fit the profile and they themselves decided (without any external pressures) to removes such articles.

Ana the Ist said:

If you want to pretend that the obvious isn't happening....well that seems pretty on brand for Australians.

Click to expand...

I'm not an Australian. But, wow, what a statement to make. Characterising all Australians like this. You really should feel ashamed of yourself.
Also, I'm not pretending anything. I'm just asking for some evidence, any evidence in support of the claim that you have made.
It really is a serious claim. Don't you think it should be supported by evidence?

Ana the Ist said:

How many cases did it take for them to strip you guys of your dignity and humanity and shove you into quarantine camps? 9?

Click to expand...

Quarantine camps??????
Oh, that's right, I remember seeing such silliness spoken by Fox News Opinion show hosts.

Valletta said:

State courts have ruled elections laws were broken. The Biden people secretly worked both with the FBI, Justice Department, and Big Tech to fool the American people in order to get Joe elected. That sounds like a "rigged" election to a lot of people.

Click to expand...

60 failed cases in the courts