What do we learn from the Twitter docs on the Hunter Biden story?

I've read mostly that we don't learn much new: that the Twitter staff (legal and otherwise) debated it, disagreed, worried about charges of bias, worried about being hooked by a Russian hack job, ultimately decided to be cautious. This much I already knew from other reporting.

What more does the Taibi stuff reveal?

That's an awfully generous characterization.

Hunter's laptop was labeled Russian Misinformation repeatedly throughout the main stream media. The New York Post's reporting was banned. The White House Press Secretary was suspended. Perhaps a well-funded cabal, as Time magazine reported; made that happen. If so, to what end?

I did specifically ask about the stuff from the Musk Twitter dump. Anything new from that, is my question.

What’s new? The evidence. It was crazy conspiracy theories previously.

I continue my belief that direct access is the best way to analyze the actual material. Given the length of time, and presumably the mass of emails/tweets, I can understand a need for a quick synopsis. Ultimately, having access to the actual material, in a chronological format, will allow us to see for ourselves what went on. Reports that Twitter took requests from the political parties to block posts and topics is concerning, as is the delay in acknowledging the reality of Hunter's laptop. I'm not confident in TS's benign initial assessment.

I agree that this is the best way. I'm just asking if anyone has read them and found anything new. I'm just curious. I don't feel like reading them, so I have read a couple of summaries of them. Nothing that I hadn't "heard of" before as likely being the case.

I guess no surprise revelations, then?

Do you think these Twitter exchanges make a difference in the larger political power gambit? I can't tell.

The surprise revelations hinge on FBI involvement.

I read this summary and breakdown of opposing views of the story. Seems reasonable, overall. But it is just one dude.

https://www.readtangle.com/twitter-f...gle-newsletter

The FBI had Hunter's laptop since Dec 2019. They knew it was real, but they worked with Twitter to call it Russian disinformation. The coordination/collusion to squelch the story increased in frequency as the 2020 election approached.

That's what the Twitter release shows you?

They're not done, and the first release is part of the story. There is more to come, apparently. No one has seen the documents outside of what Matt Taibbi wrote. My understanding is that he is working directly with Elon.

The release does mention "federal law enforcement" warnings to Twitter. The rest comes from testimony. Read Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt's series of posts about his deposition of FBI agent Elvis Chan, for a start.

https://twitter.com/Eric_Schmitt/sta...33187135393793

Yeah, the Taibbi-Musk thing is curious. I'm not sure what to make of that yet. I'm holding off judgment, probably for a long while, until I know more about what agreement was made between.

I think Musk trusts Taibbi. He was a journalist covering the 2016 Trump campaign, and grew disillusioned with the MSM when what they reported didn’t comport with what he experienced. He then started reporting on culture war issues, independently.

For the record, I have no objection to the FBI working with all social media companies to counter efforts from foreign countries to influence elections 9r otherwise screw with our stability and perceptions. The more the better (to a point). I took the warnings of Comey (etc al) very seriously, and still do. I think that it is important to distinguish between protecting the country and favoring one party over another. I am not (yet) convinced of the latter and still believe that they were doing the former. My opinion may change on the latter, but my desire to guard against foreign meddling will likely not change.

But the FBI appeared to be warning that something was disinformation, when they knew it was not. I have a problem with that.

If it is that clear, from the start, I agree with you. My sense is that it was not clear at the start, there was some disagreement and an evolving clarity and a decision finally to remain cautious (about Russian disinformation). If you mean just the existence of the laptop, I never doubted it and am not as clear about that. On suppressing embarrassing porn pics, I am glad that Twitter and others do that, no matter who the person is. I wish that they would suppress more, as a rule, when it comes to exposure of private lives.

The Hill is reasonably centrist. this piece lays out the larger issue, which is the government manipulating information by proxy. It’s a novel first amendment issue, and the MO and LA attorneys general have a suit in progress.

I have never cared much about this laptop story, and never commented on it. I don't have all that strong an interest now, but I thought I'd start a thread that others might be more interested in. I have no ax to grind here. I'm more intrigued with the journalistic angle, as I mentioned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dneal

The Hill is reasonably centrist. this piece lays out the larger issue, which is the government manipulating information by proxy. It’s a novel first amendment issue, and the MO and LA attorneys general have a suit in progress.

---

I'll get to it later, probs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TSherbs

I have never cared much about this laptop story, and never commented on it. I don't have all that strong an interest now, but I thought I'd start a thread that others might be more interested in. I have no ax to grind here. I'm more intrigued with the journalistic angle, as I mentioned.

---

The laptop story is a record of Hunter's international dealings, because of the email on it. Burisma, China, Devon Archer (John Kerry's stepson), 10% to the "big guy", etc... Hunter's business associate Tony Bobulinski has been interviewed about it. It lays out all the things the anti-Trumpers said that family does/did/would do. Depending on the poll, anywhere from 5-20% of voters wouldn't have voted for Biden in 2020, if they knew about it.

That's why it's a big deal, and why the media squelching the story (and using 51 intel experts as actual disinformation) has Musk releasing information and Trump "truthing"(?) about it.