It really is quite a shame that the mainstream media has declined to address the ongoing release of the Twitter Files, considering just how problematic the information dissemination has become.
Journalist Matt Taibbi, after all, is not even a Republican, but he recognizes the growing authoritarianism in the swamp, especially evident in the eleventh installment of the Twitter files.
This particular installment is deeply disturbing, as it underscores the close relationship with intelligence communities who have a bad habit of colluding with Russian disinformers, notably Igor Danchenko, who has long since been firmly linked to Team Clinton.
Needless to say, Danchenko did a whole lot of the Clintons’ dirty work, including poisoning the well of public opinion against conservatives, in particular Trump.
“In August 2017, when Facebook decided to suspend 300 accounts with ‘suspected Russian origin,’ Twitter wasn’t worried. Its leaders were sure they didn’t have a Russia problem,” Taibbi reported.
Too bad Democrats didn’t like the fact that Twitter stated it did not, in in fact, have a “Russia disinformation” problem, which is precisely why Democrats, such as Senator Mark Warner, openly told Twitter what to do and not do, as evidenced by a 2017 email from Public Policy VP Colin Crowell to then-Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey.
“Warner has political incentive to keep this issue at top of the news, maintain pressure on us and rest of industry to keep producing material for them, and generate interest for the Nov 1st hearing that is planned,” Crowell wrote urgently.
Oh, that’s nice. A Democrat has “political incentive” to control the narrative on Twitter, an allegedly private company.
As it appears, Twitter was more like Tencent in Communist China, where the ruling CCP also dictates what companies do and don’t do.
And that’s because there is no real separation of public and private in China, at least in terms of wielding power.
The type of power craved by Hillary Clinton, who openly lectured Twitter on its alleged unwillingness to combat “cyber warfare.”
“It’s time for Twitter to stop dragging its heels and live up to the fact that its platform is being used as a tool for cyber-warfare,” Clinton snarled.
Apparently, when Clinton barks, Big Tech listens, as revealed in Taibbi’s continued revelations.
“In growing anxiety over its PR problems, Twitter formed a ‘Russia Task Force’ to proactively self-investigate. The ‘Russia Task Force’ started mainly with data shared from counterparts at Facebook, centered around accounts supposedly tied to Russia’s Internet Research Agency (IRA),” Taibbi continued.
Key emphasis on “supposedly,” given what Taibbi reveals next.
“No evidence of a coordinated approach, all of the accounts found seem to be lone-wolf type activity (different timing, spend, targeting, <$10k in ad spend),” Taibbi added.
So much for the sustained cyber warfare Clinton claimed existed.
The same warfare her foundation likely engendered in the first place.
Even more disturbing revelations emerged the twelfth installment of the Twitter files, wherein Taibbi detailed how public agencies began disregarding Twitter entirely and attempting to bully the platform through the mainstream media.
“By 2020, Twitter was struggling with the problem of public and private agencies bypassing them and going straight to the media with lists of suspect accounts. In February 2020, as COVID broke out, the Global Engagement Center – a fledgling analytic/intelligence arms of the State Department – went to the media with a report called, ‘Russian Disinformation Apparatus Taking Advantage of Coronavirus Concerns,” Taibbi continued.
The Global Engagement Center (GEC) was one that actually pointed out things the public probably should be aware of, like the high likelihood that COVID originated from a lab.
“The GEC flagged accounts as ‘Russian personas and proxies’ based on criteria like, ‘Describing the Coronavirus as an engineered bioweapon,’ blaming ‘research conducted at the Wuhan institute,’ and ‘attributing the appearance of the virus to the CIA,” Taibbi added, “State also flagged accounts that retweeted news that Twitter banned the popular U.S. ZeroHedge, claiming the episode ‘led to another flurry of disinformation narratives.’ [Zero Hedge] had done reports speculating that the virus had lab origin.”
Needless to say, Twitter executives did not like the fact that the GEC dared to raise inconvenient truths, including the former Trust and Safety Chief Yoel Roth, who didn’t seem to promote much safety for minors when he encouraged their usage of sexual hookup application Grindr in his dissertation.
“Roth saw GEC’s move as an attempt by the GEC to use intel from other agencies to ‘insert themselves’ into the content moderation club that included Twitter, Facebook, the FBI, DHS, and others,” Taibbi noted.
Of course he did.
And of course Roth didn’t want any entity that was daring to look beyond the media narrative, especially regarding COVID.
“When the FBI informed Twitter the GEC wanted to be included in the regular ‘industry call’ between companies like Twitter and Facebook and the DHS and FBI, Twitter leaders balked at first. Facebook, Google, and Twitter executives were united in opposition to GEC’s inclusion, with ostensible reasons including, ‘The GEC’s mandate for offensive IO to promote American interests,” Taibbi added.
Right. How frightening.
Apparently telling the truth is “offensive” to American interests.
One can only imagine the truths buried in the Biden laptops.
Author: Jane Jones
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
