A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
WHY WOULD TWITTER CENSOR THE BIDEN STORY AND NOT THE PISS TAPE STORY?
TOMMY SAYS THE BIDEN STORY SEEMED FAULTY. OH and THE PISS TAPE STORY SEEMED BUTTONED UP?
Musk/Twitter Document Dump
- Thread starter stollcpa
- Start date
TOMMY SAYS THE BIDEN STORY SEEMED FAULTY. OH and THE PISS TAPE STORY SEEMED BUTTONED UP?
I don't know and I don't give three shits. Who the **** cares what Twitter does?
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Why are you responding in this thread? Are you hammered?
Hint: THE THREAD IS ABOUT TWITTER
The post I responded to was about the MSM and Hunter Biden. You responded to my post, I said I could be wrong, and you suddenly flew off into rampage. I don't think I'm the one who was drunk.
Thank you for these two examples of ignorance. While their willfulness can be debated, their total lack of knowledge is undeniable.
Part of Twitters reasoning for censoring the Biden laptop story was the information was ostensibly illegally obtained.
Trumps tax returns got no such consideration, even though they were 100 percent illegally obtained.
The double standard is absolutely ridiculous.
Did Trump request the tax returns be blocked? From the stories I read, Biden made such a request on the laptop. Trump also made requests.
"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," he said, adding that "celebrities and unknowns alike could be removed or reviewed at the behest of a political party."
Twitter granted requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign to remove content in 2020, report says
Elon Musk has only condemned the Biden campaign, despite the report he hyped showing the Trump White House also requested that Twitter remove content.
So at least in '20, Trump had requests honored by Twitter. The tax returns are a better analogy than the tape since both were hacked. I just am not sure Trump made the complaint. I haven't done more than a 60 second look, the secret may be out there. Musk did not leak items that Trump wanted blocked that were, so it is tough to get an apples to apples comparison.
A
anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Guest
Twitter released trump's tax returns? News to me
Trump was supposed to release them when he was running on 2016....or did you believe his audit excuse?
Appears he was hiding tax fraud....whoops
It shouldn’t have mattered, although I’m sure Trump requested removal.Did Trump request the tax returns be blocked? From the stories I read, Biden made such a request on the laptop. Trump also made requests.
"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," he said, adding that "celebrities and unknowns alike could be removed or reviewed at the behest of a political party."
Twitter granted requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign to remove content in 2020, report says
Elon Musk has only condemned the Biden campaign, despite the report he hyped showing the Trump White House also requested that Twitter remove content.www.google.com
So at least in '20, Trump had requests honored by Twitter. The tax returns are a better analogy than the tape since both were hacked. I just am not sure Trump made the complaint. I haven't done more than a 60 second look, the secret may be out there. Musk did not leak items that Trump wanted blocked that were, so it is tough to get an apples to apples comparison.
Both instances went explicitly against Twitters own policies on sharing hacked material or personal and private information.
Only one was acted on, and it was acted on immediately.
I’m not aware of any instances where the Times story on Trumps tax returns was blocked by Twitter.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
We can attribute “part of twitter’s reasoning” for anything and anywhere that fits the bill. The truth of the matter is that Twitter was run by leftist activists and they were not going to let anything come out about a democratic presidential candidate that was basically hiding in a basement waiting for the clock to run out.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
This entire thread is about the election engineering occurring at Twitter in October/November 2016. If you don’t care what Twitter does/did then why are you in the thread?
If the debate is 2016, Twitter allowed #HillaryHealth which was the beginning of the Clinton was having strokes/mental decline and was surely going to be totally incompetent or dead shortly after the election.
A
anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Guest
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Start a poll and see if anybody remembers #HillaryHealth. I sure don’t and I’m an active (too much so) Twitter user. Doubt anybody else does. This looks like a left wing talking point in response to all this. Much like the “Taibbi is now doing PR for the world’s richest man” tropes.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
They can’t block a story - they can block amplification / sharing of the story on their app. Clearly that’s what he meant.
Then don't post a comment about what the MSM was doing in a thread about Twitter. Jesus.
I remembered the health issue in 16, I googled Twitter 2016 Clinton Health, found a 2016 BBC article. I do not use Twitter to get talking points. I logged into Twitter a week ago for the first time since 2017. The thing can, and should, go bankrupt and disappear forever.
Clinton health myth: From Twitter theories to a Trump speech
In the 2016 presidential campaign, the line between fringe theory and stump speech material is blurring, on the subject of Hillary Clinton's health.
www.google.com
One of our frequent posters here was all in on "Clinton has neurological issues and can't reason herself out of a paper bag" which is why I remembered the issue from 16 and suspected it had a Twitter beginning. Sure enough, BBC at the time suggests it had a Twitter beginning with that hashtag.
Now maybe BBC had a time machine and wrote that in prep for 2022. Or it happened.
Why on God's earth do you frequent Twitter AND admit it in public and hate it? "Oh my God, this place is horribly biased against me and I know because I am one of the biggest consumers of its product" doesn't make sense to me.
I suspect Twitter had a bias, I am arguing the thumb ain't as large as portrayed. Again, the Twitter story leaked by Musk said that both campaigns in 20 raised complaints and both were acted on.
And if bias is a problem, is Musk urging people to vote R and supporting DeSantis an issue?
Twitter might work if we were smart consumers. We aren't, which is why some of the people with the biggest followers are off the wall crazies.
Which goes to the bigger point, why follow individuals at all on politics. I get if one likes an athlete following them. Or a musician. Or a scientist, or an author. Pundits? Just crazy to follow. My advice, largely don't follow people telling one how/what to think. Don't follow them on Twitter. Don't watch Hannity, don't watch Maddow. Don't read them. We have to stop letting others think for us. Frankly Twitter would be worth it if they banned politics completely.
If you’re referring to the story that you linked above, although Taibbi did say both sides raised complaints, he also said that the system wasn’t balanced and that it favored democrats.I remembered the health issue in 16, I googled Twitter 2016 Clinton Health, found a 2016 BBC article. I do not use Twitter to get talking points. I logged into Twitter a week ago for the first time since 2017. The thing can, and should, go bankrupt and disappear forever.
Clinton health myth: From Twitter theories to a Trump speech
In the 2016 presidential campaign, the line between fringe theory and stump speech material is blurring, on the subject of Hillary Clinton's health.www.google.com
One of our frequent posters here was all in on "Clinton has neurological issues and can't reason herself out of a paper bag" which is why I remembered the issue from 16 and suspected it had a Twitter beginning. Sure enough, BBC at the time suggests it had a Twitter beginning with that hashtag.
Now maybe BBC had a time machine and wrote that in prep for 2022. Or it happened.
Why on God's earth do you frequent Twitter AND admit it in public and hate it? "Oh my God, this place is horribly biased against me and I know because I am one of the biggest consumers of its product" doesn't make sense to me.
I suspect Twitter had a bias, I am arguing the thumb ain't as large as portrayed. Again, the Twitter story leaked by Musk said that both campaigns in 20 raised complaints and both were acted on.
And if bias is a problem, is Musk urging people to vote R and supporting DeSantis an issue?
Twitter might work if we were smart consumers. We aren't, which is why some of the people with the biggest followers are off the wall crazies.
Which goes to the bigger point, why follow individuals at all on politics. I get if one likes an athlete following them. Or a musician. Or a scientist, or an author. Pundits? Just crazy to follow. My advice, largely don't follow people telling one how/what to think. Don't follow them on Twitter. Don't watch Hannity, don't watch Maddow. Don't read them. We have to stop letting others think for us. Frankly Twitter would be worth it if they banned politics completely.
Which is pretty obvious if you have eyes.
I am not disagreeing it may have been biased, I don't spend my life looking for such stuff. I am saying the degree is often presented as "libs can do anything and all conservatives are stymied" isn't right.
Part of the bias problem is the crazies on places like 4-chan skew right. There are not as many organized crazy left. They exist, they just are not organized in the same way and numbers as the right. So crazy q-anon gets taken down the result is "where is the left being taken down". Well, there aren't nearly as many left q-anon/proud boys/4-chan/8-chan people/groups today.
So yes, I accept bias existed. Part, not all, of bias comes from who wants to push the envelope. People who do not accept rules apply to them will push the envelope.
Where I think a stronger case exists is on cancelling. If people are using Twitter to advance cancelling people it seems to me to run a foul of bullying rules. Yes, even bullies can be bullied.
A
anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Guest
Or because you are so biased, being fair appears to be favoring the other side
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
I very much enjoy Twitter - I don’t claim victim status. I’m able to sniff (often) out false claims and blatant propaganda and mostly enjoy Twitter for the anti-narrative takes and mostly for funny memes.I remembered the health issue in 16, I googled Twitter 2016 Clinton Health, found a 2016 BBC article. I do not use Twitter to get talking points. I logged into Twitter a week ago for the first time since 2017. The thing can, and should, go bankrupt and disappear forever.
Clinton health myth: From Twitter theories to a Trump speech
In the 2016 presidential campaign, the line between fringe theory and stump speech material is blurring, on the subject of Hillary Clinton's health.www.google.com
One of our frequent posters here was all in on "Clinton has neurological issues and can't reason herself out of a paper bag" which is why I remembered the issue from 16 and suspected it had a Twitter beginning. Sure enough, BBC at the time suggests it had a Twitter beginning with that hashtag.
Now maybe BBC had a time machine and wrote that in prep for 2022. Or it happened.
Why on God's earth do you frequent Twitter AND admit it in public and hate it? "Oh my God, this place is horribly biased against me and I know because I am one of the biggest consumers of its product" doesn't make sense to me.
I suspect Twitter had a bias, I am arguing the thumb ain't as large as portrayed. Again, the Twitter story leaked by Musk said that both campaigns in 20 raised complaints and both were acted on.
And if bias is a problem, is Musk urging people to vote R and supporting DeSantis an issue?
Twitter might work if we were smart consumers. We aren't, which is why some of the people with the biggest followers are off the wall crazies.
Which goes to the bigger point, why follow individuals at all on politics. I get if one likes an athlete following them. Or a musician. Or a scientist, or an author. Pundits? Just crazy to follow. My advice, largely don't follow people telling one how/what to think. Don't follow them on Twitter. Don't watch Hannity, don't watch Maddow. Don't read them. We have to stop letting others think for us. Frankly Twitter would be worth it if they banned politics completely.
That’s not the point. The point is that Twitter, as a self/styled public square, has been squashing conservative voices - even when they’ve later been proven correct - and amplifying leftist content. This serves as a direct threat to the safety and stability of our republic. Period.
The Commanding Officer is responsible for everything that happens on his watch. I thought you had a military background.
I miss the days when the moonbats dominated Crazy World. Seems the wingnuts have conquered Crazy World and I’m not happy about that.
Of course I do. She had pneumonia but had to get right back to campaigning because they were making a huge deal. There were pictures of her shaking her head or something and implications she had a neurological problem. Trump then picked up and started talking about her not being fit and her stamina.
It was a nothing burger. It was no more significant than the stupid tan suit thing during the Obama years. I didn’t vote for Trump and I didn’t vote for HRC. However, it had absolutely nothing to do with her health. Well, maybe her being in good health was a factor . . .
And I would add that this is why so many have so little trust in our elections now. It’s not that votes were “stolen.” It’s that the media and the tech companies have distorted the process with what’s covered and what isn’t. Who controls the information controls the election.
I think you meant to say 2020,not 2016. That was what Goat, Mark and others were referencing...
I wasn't really "on" twitter, in 2016. In fact I'm not sure I knew what it was...
Was twitter "censoring" any of the stories about Clinton's emails, or the "renewed investigation" that Comey announced a couple of weeks out from the election? If Trump was on twitter then (I assume he was), was he using his platform to amplify the situation, or were his posts "censored"?
And on the other hand was Twitter reporting on the investigations into Team Trump, via the Steele report, esp with regards to Carter Page? I mean the wingers on this board tell us that the FBI investigation was designed to "influence" the 2016 election. So if that's the case, and if twitter was being used as a platform for "election engineering" then one assumes the Page spy story would be wildly rampant on twitter leading up to the 2016 election?
But I suspect that the opposite is true and that a major topic on twitter in Oct/Nov 2016 was the renewed "investigation" into Clinton, which resulted from Weiner's laptop. And if that's the case, I imagine the events from 2016 and how they were "discussed" on twitter in the leadup to he 2016 election played a significant role in twitter deciding not to repeat the mistake of amplifying similarly unverified salacious claims in 2020.
If they did decide to squash what you characterize as "conservative voices" maybe it's a result of not doing so in 2016, when twitter was awash in anti-Clinton conspiracy theories? Just speculating...
Last edited:
Two years, 1+ VN, 11B40.
Cav Recon Scout.(reviled by our dear Ranger poster)
Cannon fodder.
The highest officer I ever saw was a Captain, other than some ****ing Major General who locked my heels for not saluting his ****ing jeep at Lai Khe.
Show me where Trump ever knew what those bastards were doing. Then blow smoke.
Yes, the left at one time had the numerical superiority. I am sure it will change back.
I have often given credit to William F Buckley for rejecting the wing nuts. He was a very smart man. I hope the Democrats have someone equally smart and honorable when the tide switches back toward moonbats.
Thanks for your service. Recon deserves respect too.
I’ve never chewed out anyone for not saluting or properly saluting. I have had senior enlisted with me do that and I never asked them to do it. That’s their job and they know it. I love the Navy.
The problem here is that government wasn’t doing what you think they were doing. Sorry, Sir, but you believe far too much in things that aren’t true.
That’s the problem, though. What the blue check marks at Twitter decided was an unhinged QANON conspiracy theory turned out to be 100 percent accurate in the Hunter Biden laptop scandal. Their suppression of that story undoubtedly influenced the election when there was no reason to suppress it. At least not compared to the aforementioned Trump stories that were obviously fake from the get go(pee tape, anyone?) that we’re promulgated far and wide on the same platform.
The question is, who decides what is fake and what is not?
Once Twitter went all in on combating “misinformation” on their platform, they needed to be clear and consistent in the way they implemented and deployed those policies.
They clearly weren’t.
A
anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Guest
Which is why the Russian collusion was important.
And many of the election deniers are talking about actual votes, which is why the excessive push to recount votes.
Either you are in the minority or the election deniers have moved on to media bias now that all the recounts came up with zilch
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Sorry you’re right - I was conflating the russia gate coverage and amplification in 2016 with the suppression of anything negative about Biden in 2020.
Twitter was not awash in anti-Clinton conspiracies. All big tech and big media was amplifying how much of a buffoon trump was at the time.
We shall agree one day.
I bear you no ill will.
My 'service' appears to be diametrically opposite from yours.
Did you ever get the chance to pick pieces of what was once a living American soldier out of your clothes, or dig up gravesites to see if they covered up caches?
Perspective can be a bitch!
Last edited:
