It was a poll from Rasmussen Reports, following Big Tech censorship of scandalous information about the Biden family leading up to the 2020 election, found those actions probably cost President Donald Trump the White House.
That organization reported, at the time, “Mark Zuckerberg recently said a warning from the FBI about ‘Russian propaganda’ caused Facebook to censor the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop in the weeks before the 2020 election. Forty-eight percent (48%) of voters say if the media had fully reported the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop before the 2020 election, it’s unlikely Joe Biden would have been elected president.”
Since then, the FBI openly has been accused of interfering in the election by instructing social media companies to be wary of Russian “disinformation,” even though the reporting, led by the New York Post, was, in fact, accurate reporting on the Biden family scandals.
Now Fox News is reporting the government’s decision to meddle in the reporting on the issue is raising concerns about First Amendment violations.
That constitutional provision prohibits the government from censoring information but allows private corporations to do so. In the case involving the Bidens, it was corporations censoring information – at the instruction of the government.
Fox News reported that Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow Hans von Spakovsky said Big Tech companies could be seen as agents for the government – if they were taking its direction.
“The First Amendment applies to the government and prohibits censorship by government agencies and entities, not private actors,” he explained. “However, when a private company is censoring information based on direction, coordination, and cooperation with the government, then legally it may be considered to be acting as an agent for the government, and it may be found to be violating the First Amendment.”
The direction from the government to social media long had been evident. It was confirmed by Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, who admitted to taking instructions from the FBI on what to suppress.
Now that Elon Musk is in charge of Twitter, following his takeover, details are becoming available.
Fox reported, “A Twitter Files installment released by Substack journalist Matt Taibbi last week revealed Twitter’s former head of safety, Yoel Roth, apparently attended weekly meetings with the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence about moderating misinformation ahead of the 2020 election.
“In October 2020, just weeks before the election, the FBI prompted Twitter to take action after it flagged two tweets related to alleged voter fraud, according to a screenshot of internal communications posted by Taibbi. Twitter responded by slapping a label that said ‘Learn how voting is safe and secure’ on one of the tweets from a GOP Indiana politician, according to the screenshot.”
And the screen captures reveal Twitter’s current policy director, Nick Pickles, and a marketing employee discussing how the company detects misinformation partly through “partnerships” with the FBI and DHS.
17. During this time, executives were also clearly liaising with federal enforcement and intelligence agencies about moderation of election-related content. While we’re still at the start of reviewing the #TwitterFiles, we’re finding out more about these interactions every day.
— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) December 9, 2022
19. Pickles quickly asks if they could “just say “partnerships.” After a pause, he says, “e.g. not sure we’d describe the FBI/DHS as experts.” pic.twitter.com/d3EaYJb5eR
— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) December 9, 2022
Then there was the presence at the time of the now-fired Jim Baker at Twitter.
He “got his top job at the social media giant after playing a key role” in pushing the debunked Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy theory while he was in the FBI, the report said.
He claimed that the company could go ahead and “assume” that the Hunter Biden laptop scandals were from “hacked” materials, even though there was no evidence of that.
The Biden White House continues to claim is had no part in pressuring Twitter to try to suppress the damaging information regarding Hunter, his overseas deals, and the apparent involvement of Joe Biden.
“We were not involved,” claimed spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre.
However, only a year ago, then-Biden press secretary Jen Psaki “boasted” of the White House’s involvement in what “social media platforms” were allowed.
“We are in regular touch with the social media platforms, and those engagements typically happen through members of our senior staff and also members of our COVID-19 team … specifically on the pandemic,” Psaki said, according to Fix.
Constitutional expert Ilya Shapiro, of the Manhattan Institute, told Fox News Digital when the FBI “asks” for something, it’s “serious,” and that’s why the scandal of its influence on Twitter and other social media is so bad.
And George Mason University professor David Bernstein told Fox News Digital that “absent a true national security emergency, it’s inappropriate for anyone with a political role in the government to be exerting pressure or even lobbying Twitter regarding content.”
He said the Twitter case is trickier, as there haven’t been enough details released.
Others suggested a congressional investigation is needed to reveal the truth about what the FBI was doing, and whether the agency’s actions remained constitutional, or not.
That apparently already is being planned.
“Some fingers are getting pointed at the FBI’s Washington, D.C., office in ways that are really troubling,” Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., said in the report. “The accumulation of accusations pointed at the FBI’s Washington, D.C., bureau, I think, make it ripe for serious investigation by Congress.”
What has been revealed already is that Twitter suppressed the Post’s Hunter Biden story, and then blacklisted or shadowbanned certain information. Then the company banned President Trump and staffers pointed out that happened even though he actually had not violated company policies.
via wnd
