With the release of the final series of Twitter Files on the weekend by independent journalists Michael Shellenberger and Bari Weiss, it became even more clear former Twitter executives conspired against former President Donald Trump and, as Elon Musk said, “operated as a Democratic Party activist machine.”.Trump’s twitter account was suspended on Jan. 6, 2021 as events unfolded at the US Capitol Building, with the fourth installment of the Twitter Files revealing how Twitter staff were pushing for changes to official Twitter policies with the sole intent to get Trump banned permanently..As Shellenberger wrote, the policy states that posts from elected officials who violate Twitter’s rules can remain up “if it directly contributes to understanding or discussion of a matter of public concern.”.Later that night, according to another message shared by Shellenberger, a Twitter engineer asked Twitter’s former head of trust and safety, Yoel Roth: “I wonder if there has been discussion about reshaping the rules around official accounts,” naming Trump’s as an example. .“I feel a lot of debates around exceptions stem from the fact that Trump’s account is not technically different from anybody else and yet treated differently due to his personal status, without corresponding Twitter rules” the engineer wrote..On Jan. 7, Twitter executives sought "to create justifications to ban Trump — seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders - expressing no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban," wrote Shellenberger.."For years, Twitter had resisted calls to ban Trump," said Shellenberger, quoting the executives themselves from 2018: "'Blocking a world leader from Twitter would hide important info... [and] hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.'".Former CEO Jack Dorsey was vacationing in early January 2021, phoning in to meetings, though he delegated much of the duties handling the situation to senior executives Roth and Vijaya Gadde, head of Legal, Policy and Trust, said Shellenberger, who shared internal communications between the executives regarding a new rule, approved by Dorsey, that would result in a permanent suspension to accounts with five violations..“GUESS WHAT,” Roth, wrote to colleagues on Jan. 7, according to a screenshot on an internal message. “Jack just approved repeat offender for civic integrity.”.A colleague then asked if Dorsey’s decision would translate to a Trump ban, also asking “does the incitement to violence aspect change that calculus?”.Roth tells the worker the new policy wouldn’t result in Trump’s removal, since the former president “continues to just have his one strike” remaining..“The exchange between Roth and his colleagues makes clear that they had been pushing @jack for greater restrictions on the speech Twitter allows around elections,” wrote Shellenberger..However, internal and external pressure on Dorsey grew, including from former first lady Michelle Obama and several other prominent individuals and groups, calling on Twitter to permanently ban the president..On Jan. 8, 2021, it did just that, banning Trump’s account permanently after a review found his tweets may have inspired the attack. Twitter suspended the page “due to the risk of further incitement of violence,” it said..Shellenberger wrote he found only one dissenting opinion to the ban from a staff member, among the many communications he obtained. .“This might be an unpopular opinion but one-off ad hoc decisions like this that don’t appear rooted in policy are IMHO a slippery slope and reflect an alternatively unequal dictatorial problem,” the staffer said..“This now appears to be a fiat by an online platform CEO with a global presence that can gatekeep speech for the entire world — which seems unsustainable.”.The initial Twitter Files releases showed Democrat insiders, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence collaborated with Twitter executives to suppress The New York Post’s coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 presidential election..Two subsequent Twitter Files releases showed how the social media giant secretly blacklisted conservative tweets and users and how executives went out of their way to justify retaining inflammatory posts from Democrats and leftists..Twitter staff had an obvious bias favoring the Democrat Party, with documents in the Twitter Files showing staff and senior executives "were overwhelmingly progressive," pointing out that in 2018, 2020 and 2022, 96%, 98%, & 99% of Twitter staff's political donations went to Democrats..But the bias was deeper than simply donating to Democrats. Roth tweeted in 2017 that there were "ACTUAL NAZIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE." And last April he told a colleague that "his goal is to drive change in the world, which is why he decided not to become an academic.".But Musk is not done. He tweeted on Sunday “my pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci.” More to come as that unfolds.
With the release of the final series of Twitter Files on the weekend by independent journalists Michael Shellenberger and Bari Weiss, it became even more clear former Twitter executives conspired against former President Donald Trump and, as Elon Musk said, “operated as a Democratic Party activist machine.”.Trump’s twitter account was suspended on Jan. 6, 2021 as events unfolded at the US Capitol Building, with the fourth installment of the Twitter Files revealing how Twitter staff were pushing for changes to official Twitter policies with the sole intent to get Trump banned permanently..As Shellenberger wrote, the policy states that posts from elected officials who violate Twitter’s rules can remain up “if it directly contributes to understanding or discussion of a matter of public concern.”.Later that night, according to another message shared by Shellenberger, a Twitter engineer asked Twitter’s former head of trust and safety, Yoel Roth: “I wonder if there has been discussion about reshaping the rules around official accounts,” naming Trump’s as an example. .“I feel a lot of debates around exceptions stem from the fact that Trump’s account is not technically different from anybody else and yet treated differently due to his personal status, without corresponding Twitter rules” the engineer wrote..On Jan. 7, Twitter executives sought "to create justifications to ban Trump — seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders - expressing no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban," wrote Shellenberger.."For years, Twitter had resisted calls to ban Trump," said Shellenberger, quoting the executives themselves from 2018: "'Blocking a world leader from Twitter would hide important info... [and] hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions.'".Former CEO Jack Dorsey was vacationing in early January 2021, phoning in to meetings, though he delegated much of the duties handling the situation to senior executives Roth and Vijaya Gadde, head of Legal, Policy and Trust, said Shellenberger, who shared internal communications between the executives regarding a new rule, approved by Dorsey, that would result in a permanent suspension to accounts with five violations..“GUESS WHAT,” Roth, wrote to colleagues on Jan. 7, according to a screenshot on an internal message. “Jack just approved repeat offender for civic integrity.”.A colleague then asked if Dorsey’s decision would translate to a Trump ban, also asking “does the incitement to violence aspect change that calculus?”.Roth tells the worker the new policy wouldn’t result in Trump’s removal, since the former president “continues to just have his one strike” remaining..“The exchange between Roth and his colleagues makes clear that they had been pushing @jack for greater restrictions on the speech Twitter allows around elections,” wrote Shellenberger..However, internal and external pressure on Dorsey grew, including from former first lady Michelle Obama and several other prominent individuals and groups, calling on Twitter to permanently ban the president..On Jan. 8, 2021, it did just that, banning Trump’s account permanently after a review found his tweets may have inspired the attack. Twitter suspended the page “due to the risk of further incitement of violence,” it said..Shellenberger wrote he found only one dissenting opinion to the ban from a staff member, among the many communications he obtained. .“This might be an unpopular opinion but one-off ad hoc decisions like this that don’t appear rooted in policy are IMHO a slippery slope and reflect an alternatively unequal dictatorial problem,” the staffer said..“This now appears to be a fiat by an online platform CEO with a global presence that can gatekeep speech for the entire world — which seems unsustainable.”.The initial Twitter Files releases showed Democrat insiders, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence collaborated with Twitter executives to suppress The New York Post’s coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 presidential election..Two subsequent Twitter Files releases showed how the social media giant secretly blacklisted conservative tweets and users and how executives went out of their way to justify retaining inflammatory posts from Democrats and leftists..Twitter staff had an obvious bias favoring the Democrat Party, with documents in the Twitter Files showing staff and senior executives "were overwhelmingly progressive," pointing out that in 2018, 2020 and 2022, 96%, 98%, & 99% of Twitter staff's political donations went to Democrats..But the bias was deeper than simply donating to Democrats. Roth tweeted in 2017 that there were "ACTUAL NAZIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE." And last April he told a colleague that "his goal is to drive change in the world, which is why he decided not to become an academic.".But Musk is not done. He tweeted on Sunday “my pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci.” More to come as that unfolds.
