Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Musk just set Twitter's devious election interference in the great wide-open.


and-then
 Share

Recommended Posts

I wonder if this is a turning point?  Will it give Walker the win?  We will see.  At best, a lot of Marxists will start to experience an inconvenient truth.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

I wonder if this is a turning point?  Will it give Walker the win?  We will see.  At best, a lot of Marxists will start to experience an inconvenient truth.

Nah.  At this point I have lost faith that the DC crowd will EVER be held to account BUT... their media propagandists cannot stop this truth from becoming known.  It will be interesting to see how CNN, NBC, MSNBC, et al, try to spin this to the benefit of the Left.  I'm hoping that a critical mass will be reached that will anger enough honest citizens to demand justice.  I have zero doubt that if this situation had been flipped and the Dems were the losers based on the skewed, lying info on the major free speech platform, they'd be in the streets inciting and taking part in actual violence.  Enough with their childish antics and double standards!

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, and-then said:

Nah.  At this point I have lost faith that the DC crowd will EVER be held to account BUT... their media propagandists cannot stop this truth from becoming known.  It will be interesting to see how CNN, NBC, MSNBC, et al, try to spin this to the benefit of the Left.  I'm hoping that a critical mass will be reached that will anger enough honest citizens to demand justice.  I have zero doubt that if this situation had been flipped and the Dems were the losers based on the skewed, lying info on the major free speech platform, they'd be in the streets inciting and taking part in actual violence.  Enough with their childish antics and double standards!

My guess? 
“More sour grapes from Musk. You have to remember where he got his seed funds from - Apartheid-era exploitation of African” style comments, shooting the messenger.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

You have to remember where he got his seed funds from -

Does the source of his seed funds invalidate the evidence he is leaking?  I don't see that at all.  Either he is leaking facts or he's fabricating and if he IS, it will quickly become apparent.  By the time all of this is in the public domain, the Left is going to be mobilized to fight this release of facts and to obfuscate, slander, fabricate and lie... whatever is required to cloud the issue and stop any kind of accountability.  The reality is clear.  The top media platform worked in tandem with the Democrat party to interfere with the 2020 election.  THAT is unacceptable and had it benefited Republicans, cities would be on fire.  The rest of us have had ENOUGH.  NO MORE...

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems a flop to me.  The thread is littered with meaningless comments that most of the evidence is buried.  It just seems to be Tweets of a reporter talking about stuff but not showing the documents. I don't think tweets are a proper format to present anything.

There wasn't anything that proved the government forced Twitter to cover things up.  It flagged stuff for review, certainly, But it was Twitter itself that evaluated the content and removed it or not.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

I thought we were told in 2016 that social media operations can't affect an election?  

I believe it was, "People are intelligent enough to not be swayed by social media"  You'd probably have to search back to 2016 to find the threads about it here though.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean there is this:

Image

But I guess it was buried under all the "James Woods is suing!" and "Trump was right!" tweets..........

People also seem to forget that Trump was president and (in theory) leader of our government during this time when government was supposedly influencing Twitter.  

Edited by Gromdor
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, F3SS said:

I didn't get to read them yet but I think this is the real thread. Sorry andthen, your link is a mess. It's all comments.

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394

No problem.  The communications are being released and these lame conclusions about the DNC and Biden campaign NOT being involved, are blatantly, provably wrong.  Those who are blowing smoke and trying to minimize this criminal behavior need to understand that such censorship is DESTROYING our Republic.  They either cannot grasp that conclusion or they simply don't care, as long as they get their agenda passed.  The other half of this nation is waking up and things are going to become unstable for all of us if we don't begin applying the law equally.  

  • Like 4
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay I suck at reposting tweets.

But I was trying to bring attention to Tweet 10

10.Both parties had access to these tools. For instance, in 2020, requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign were received and honored. However:

The however part just says that the Democrats used it more and Twitter employees donated more to Democrats.

Edited by Gromdor
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gromdor said:

Okay I suck at reposting tweets.

But I was trying to bring attention to Tweet 10

10.Both parties had access to these tools. For instance, in 2020, requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign were received and honored. However:

The however part just says that the Democrats used it more and Twitter employees donated more to Democrats.

Donated more? Almost exclusively to the tune of 95%+. I'm curious to see what type of things the Trump administration wanted squashed and if they were successful at all. By and large it seems that the dems had almost exclusive favor. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, and-then said:

Does the source of his seed funds invalidate the evidence he is leaking?  I don't see that at all.  Either he is leaking facts or he's fabricating and if he IS, it will quickly become apparent.  By the time all of this is in the public domain, the Left is going to be mobilized to fight this release of facts and to obfuscate, slander, fabricate and lie... whatever is required to cloud the issue and stop any kind of accountability.  The reality is clear.  The top media platform worked in tandem with the Democrat party to interfere with the 2020 election.  THAT is unacceptable and had it benefited Republicans, cities would be on fire.  The rest of us have had ENOUGH.  NO MORE...

Did affect how you voted?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, F3SS said:

Donated more? Almost exclusively to the tune of 95%+. I'm curious to see what type of things the Trump administration wanted squashed and if they were successful at all. By and large it seems that the dems had almost exclusive favor. 

Demographics wise, I am not surprised.  College educated west coast people are primarily Democrats.  Does that mean they can't do their job fairly?  Possibly.  My guess that is why the reported linked the donations- to throw doubt in their impartiality.  Donations in itself doesn't mean corruption.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This helps explain why the left went into convulsions when Musk bought Twitter. 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Handled.” That one word, responding to a 2020 demand to censor a list of Twitter users, speaks volumes about the thousands of documents released by Twitter’s new owner, Elon Musk, on Friday night. As many of us have long suspected, there were back channels between Twitter and the Biden 2020 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to ban critics or remove negative stories. Those seeking to discuss the scandal were simply “handled,” and nothing else had to be said.

Ultimately, the New York Post was suspended from Twitter for reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop scandal. Twitter even blocked users from sharing the Post’s story by using a tool designed for *** Blocked ***ography. Even Trump White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany was suspended for linking to the scandal.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3760753-censorship-by-surrogate-why-musks-document-dump-could-be-a-game-changer/

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"We have been discussing efforts by figures like Hillary Clinton to enlist European countries to force Twitter to restore censorship rules. Unable to rely on corporate censorship or convince users to embrace censorship, Clinton and others are resorting to good old-fashioned state censorship, even asking other countries to censor the speech of American citizens. It is an easy case to make given the long criminalization of speech in countries like France, Germany, and England."

https://jonathanturley.org/2022/12/01/the-european-union-moves-toward-a-possible-ban-of-twitter-if-musk-restores-free-speech-protections/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gromdor said:

Demographics wise, I am not surprised.  College educated west coast people are primarily Democrats.  Does that mean they can't do their job fairly?  Possibly.  My guess that is why the reported linked the donations- to throw doubt in their impartiality.  Donations in itself doesn't mean corruption.

An interesting conundrum. 

On the other side of the idea some people feel police are bias because police unions normally endorse Republicans. 

I've always tried to do every government job I've been in neutrally, but I understand how it makes people concerned about bias when it comes to big tech and police 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

An interesting conundrum. 

On the other side of the idea some people feel police are bias because police unions normally endorse Republicans. 

I've always tried to do every government job I've been in neutrally, but I understand how it makes people concerned about bias when it comes to big tech and police 

Yeah, I'm not sure what to do about this either.  We don't want to make companies a police force or even force them to be a political spectrum.  Imagine telling Truth Social that they need to hire liberals for instance.  

I think in the end we just need to accept that these aren't public forums and you must be courteous and abide by the rules of the host.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gromdor said:

Demographics wise, I am not surprised.  College educated west coast people are primarily Democrats.  Does that mean they can't do their job fairly?  Possibly.  My guess that is why the reported linked the donations- to throw doubt in their impartiality.  Donations in itself doesn't mean corruption.

They can't, they didn't and they never intended to.

They said they couldn't risk the same mistake they made in 2016, i.e; not suppressing enough voices which in turn led to Trump being elected. 

They clearly made up bs rules to suppress the laptop story. They seemed to be concerned about keeping up that lie. At the very least they were worried about scrutiny. That all couples with the banning and/or shadowbanning with many right leaning accounts with lots of followers.

They hid or tried to keep their tactics from Jack Dorsey. I've heard in the past that Jack was more altruistic about his Twitter invention. I really don't know but his people wanted him out of the loop. 

I cant say for sure if Twitter is powerful enough to sway elections but those who work there sure seemed to think it was and they did all that they could to, well, interfer with the election.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, F3SS said:

They can't, they didn't and they never intended to.

They said they couldn't risk the same mistake they made in 2016, i.e; not suppressing enough voices which in turn led to Trump being elected. 

They clearly made up bs rules to suppress the laptop story. They seemed to be concerned about keeping up that lie. At the very least they were worried about scrutiny. That all couples with the banning and/or shadowbanning with many right leaning accounts with lots of followers.

They hid or tried to keep their tactics from Jack Dorsey. I've heard in the past that Jack was more altruistic about his Twitter invention. I really don't know but his people wanted him out of the loop. 

I cant say for sure if Twitter is powerful enough to sway elections but those who work there sure seemed to think it was and they did all that they could to, well, interfer with the election.

 

A shame then.  It means we will probably have to dissolve Twitter, Truth Social, and the like because people can't be impartial with their jobs and it is too powerful of a tool for brainwashing.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Twitter’s Document release was very underwhelming, I hoped for more. It seems that Musk was just making a joke out this kinda sad.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.