27. Former VP of Global Comms Brandon Borrman asks, “Can we truthfully claim that this is part of the policy?”

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

28. To which former Deputy General Counsel Jim Baker again seems to advise staying the non-course, because “caution is warranted”:

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

29. A fundamental problem with tech companies and content moderation: many people in charge of speech know/care little about speech, and have to be told the basics by outsiders. To wit: (Twitter Link)

30. In one humorous exchange on day 1, Democratic congressman Ro Khanna reaches out to Gadde to gently suggest she hop on the phone to talk about the “backlash re speech.” Khanna was the only Democratic official I could find in the files who expressed concern. (Twitter Link) Photo Attached To This Post.

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

[Post was not numbered, I'm guessing its post 31]

Gadde replies quickly, immediately diving into the weeds of Twitter policy, unaware Khanna is more worried about the Bill of Rights:

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

32.Khanna tries to reroute the conversation to the First Amendment, mention of which is generally hard to find in the files:

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

33.Within a day, head of Public Policy Lauren Culbertson receives a ghastly letter/report from Carl Szabo of the research firm NetChoice, which had already polled 12 members of congress – 9 Rs and 3 Democrats, from “the House Judiciary Committee to Rep. Judy Chu’s office.”

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

34.NetChoice lets Twitter know a “blood bath” awaits in upcoming Hill hearings, with members saying it's a "tipping point," complaining tech has “grown so big that they can’t even regulate themselves, so government may need to intervene.”

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

35.Szabo reports to Twitter that some Hill figures are characterizing the laptop story as “tech’s Access Hollywood moment”:

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

36.Twitter files continued:
"THE FIRST AMENDMENT ISN’T ABSOLUTE”
Szabo’s letter contains chilling passages relaying Democratic lawmakers’ attitudes. They want “more” moderation, and as for the Bill of Rights, it's "not absolute"

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

36.Twitter files continued:
"THE FIRST AMENDMENT ISN’T ABSOLUTE”
Szabo’s letter contains chilling passages relaying Democratic lawmakers’ attitudes. They want “more” moderation, and as for the Bill of Rights, it's "not absolute"

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

[No number post this is the final message]

An amazing subplot of the Twitter/Hunter Biden laptop affair was how much was done without the knowledge of CEO Jack Dorsey, and how long it took for the situation to get "unfucked" (as one ex-employee put it) even after Dorsey jumped in.

(Twitter Link)

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌
238 [05/17/2022]

1:03:47
GEORGE NEWS
...THE TURN-AROUND AND QUICK FIRE 'RELEASE' OF 'DISCLOSURE' WILL BE SUPER QUICK. HOW SOON DO YOU THINK THEY'LL COME BACK TO US AFTER THE CLOSED SESSION? MATTER OF DAYS, OR WEEKS?
⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯
127 [6/1/2021]

29:19
YOUTUBE TV LIVE
THE EVIDENCE WILL BE SO OVERWHELMING THAT THERE WILL BE NO OPTION, BUT TO...... 🙌🏼
⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯
121 [5/20/2021]

11:55 PM
GEORGEnews
"We caught 'em all"
⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯
111 [3/30/2021]

11:54 PM
GEORGEnews
...they think they got away with it.
⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯
127 [6/1/2021]

[Question]
1:38:26
LadyPashta
@GEORGEnews Is Elon Musk a WH or BH??

[Answer]
12:12 AM
GEORGEnews
Musk gave the T45 WH early access to STARLINK :)
⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌⬌

∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾
﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾∾

If you don't mind reading a lot you should check this channel out. [Rattle Trap] He's very thorough with his research and he lays out huge posts on the topic he's researching. It's worth a look and we should support everyone sacrificing their time working against our common enemy. Subscribe and like everything if you like neat and slimmed down subscribed list's then make a folder in your settings and put all of the channels you don't visit often in it and create your main subscriber list folder and pin that at the top. We don't have the luxury to be picky. We're hardened digital soldiers not soft cowardly and lazy like everyone ignoring what's going on.

﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿
Lɪғᴇ ɪꜱ Bʀᴜᴛᴀʟ, Bᴜᴛ Bᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ
[G̲̅][O̲̅][D̲̅] ĐɆⱠłVɆⱤ Ʉ₴ ₣ⱤØ₥ ₮ⱧɆ ɆVłⱠ Ø₦Ɇ

Twitter Files 2

1. A new #TwitterFiles investigation reveals that teams of Twitter employees build blacklists, prevent disfavored tweets from trending, and actively limit the visibility of entire accounts or even trending topics—all in secret, without informing users.

2. Twitter once had a mission “to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers.” Along the way, barriers nevertheless were erected.

﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿

Twitter Files 2

3. Take, for example, Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (
@DrJBhattacharya
) who argued that Covid lockdowns would harm children. Twitter secretly placed him on a “Trends Blacklist,” which prevented his tweets from trending.

﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿

Twitter Files 2

4. Or consider the popular right-wing talk show host, Dan Bongino (
@dbongino), who at one point was slapped with a “Search Blacklist.”

﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿

Twitter Files 2

5. Twitter set the account of conservative activist Charlie Kirk (
@charliekirk11) to “Do Not Amplify.”

﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿

Twitter Files 2

6. Twitter denied that it does such things. In 2018, Twitter's Vijaya Gadde (then Head of Legal Policy and Trust) and Kayvon Beykpour (Head of Product) said: “We do not shadow ban.” They added: “And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.”

7. What many people call “shadow banning,” Twitter executives and employees call “Visibility Filtering” or “VF.” Multiple high-level sources confirmed its meaning.

8. “Think about visibility filtering as being a way for us to suppress what people see to different levels. It’s a very powerful tool,” one senior Twitter employee told us.

9. “VF” refers to Twitter’s control over user visibility. It used VF to block searches of individual users; to limit the scope of a particular tweet’s discoverability; to block select users’ posts from ever appearing on the “trending” page; and from inclusion in hashtag searches.

10. All without users’ knowledge.

11. “We control visibility quite a bit. And we control the amplification of your content quite a bit. And normal people do not know how much we do,” one Twitter engineer told us. Two additional Twitter employees confirmed.

12. The group that decided whether to limit the reach of certain users was the Strategic Response Team - Global Escalation Team, or SRT-GET. It often handled up to 200 "cases" a day.

13. But there existed a level beyond official ticketing, beyond the rank-and-file moderators following the company’s policy on paper. That is the “Site Integrity Policy, Policy Escalation Support,” known as “SIP-PES.”

﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿

Twitter Files 2

14. This secret group included Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust (Vijaya Gadde), the Global Head of Trust & Safety (Yoel Roth), subsequent CEOs Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal, and others.

15. This is where the biggest, most politically sensitive decisions got made. “Think high follower account, controversial,” another Twitter employee told us. For these “there would be no ticket or anything.”

[Image connected to this tweet]
16. One of the accounts that rose to this level of scrutiny was
@libsoftiktok—an account that was on the “Trends Blacklist” and was designated as “Do Not Take Action on User Without Consulting With SIP-PES.”

17. The account—which Chaya Raichik began in November 2020 and now boasts over 1.4 million followers—was subjected to six suspensions in 2022 alone, Raichik says. Each time, Raichik was blocked from posting for as long as a week.

18. Twitter repeatedly informed Raichik that she had been suspended for violating Twitter’s policy against “hateful conduct.”

﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿

Twitter Files 3

1. THREAD: The Twitter Files
THE REMOVAL OF DONALD TRUMP
Part One: October 2020-January 6th

2. The world knows much of the story of what happened between riots at the Capitol on January 6th, and the removal of President Donald Trump from Twitter on January 8th...

3. We’ll show you what hasn’t been revealed: the erosion of standards within the company in months before J6, decisions by high-ranking executives to violate their own policies, and more, against the backdrop of ongoing, documented interaction with federal agencies.

4. This first installment covers the period before the election through January 6th. Tomorrow,
@Shellenbergermd will detail the chaos inside Twitter on January 7th. On Sunday, @BariWeiss
will reveal the secret internal communications from the key date of January 8th.

[Image connected to this post]
5. Whatever your opinion on the decision to remove Trump that day, the internal communications at Twitter between January 6th-January 8th have clear historical import. Even Twitter’s employees understood in the moment it was a landmark moment in the annals of speech.

﴾ꕷѺṾⵟⱤⵟÌĠṆ﴿