All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 3, 2022 - Just Informed Talk - Craig James
46:16
TWITTER FILES: PROOF US Gov't Violated Law To CENSOR Hunter Laptop? | JustInformed News #252
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The song is getting closer.
We are the digital soldiers.
It's time they run forever.
We are the digital soldiers.
We will bring the light to this field of fight.
Hi, welcome to another episode of Just Informed News.
I'm your host, Craig.
We're doing a special episode this evening.
I'm coming to you live for a second episode of the day.
Why?
It's because we have this breaking news coming off of Twitter.
I told you guys I would bring you this story as soon as it was made available, and it was made available right after we went off the air earlier today.
So I figured I'd just run it back, do another episode for you guys, and we're going to cover the breaking bombshell news that's coming out of Twitter now.
We're going to talk about what it is, what it means, and just a little bit of context to it, and that's it.
All we're going to do is cover the Twitter Files story, this major breaking news that's talking about how there's evidence being released by Elon Musk and Twitter that shows with proof how the U.S. government influenced and cooperated with Twitter to forcefully make decisions that would censor and remove the Hunter Biden laptop story.
And we're just going to look at what it is.
We're going to ask the question, what does it really uncover?
Is there any truth to it?
Et cetera, et cetera.
I know you guys want to go through all this stuff.
We're going to get through it all.
And that's pretty much it.
Then we're going to do our God's Grace is a Greater segment, and then we're going to wrap it up.
So we're going to just jump right into the Twitter post.
But before we do that, I got to give a quick thank you and shout out to the sponsor of this episode.
You guys know him as Noble Gold.
You know, I love the holidays, and having the family together for all those special times is one of my favorite things.
But this year, I invited some extra family along, my family at Noble Gold.
They've looked after me financially this year.
They took me in and showed me how gold and silver can be used in an IRA to keep my other family safe from financial snowstorms out there.
When the wind of inflation is howling and the recession snow is falling hard, we can all sit in front of our precious metal fire keeping warm, knowing we're going to be okay.
The team at Noble Gold walked me through the entire investment process and explained the stuff I was worried about.
That's why I'm recommending my second family to you.
They're wonderful.
And this month you'll be able to get an incredible free 3-ounce Silver American Virtue coin with every qualified IRA of $20,000 or above.
You can't go wrong with Noble Gold Investments.
Call the team now at 877-646-5347.
To find out more, visit noblegoldinvestments.com.
And remember, there's always risk of loss, and past performance is not indicative.
Thank you to Noble Gold for sponsoring this episode.
There's a link in the description if you want to get more information from them.
But let's just get right into it.
I'm just going to try to keep this short and sweet and get through these really quickly.
This is the thread The thing we were waiting for Elon Musk to drop, he was supposed to drop it at 5 p.m.
Eastern time this afternoon when we started our show earlier.
And it didn't really come out until about two and a half hours after that in full.
Maybe three hours after that.
And here we are three hours later, four hours later, almost five hours later trying to get through this because it was being dropped piecemeal.
The person who dropped it is Matt Tybee.
He is obviously a reporter who was chosen to go through this information.
He's an author and has a substack where he writes articles.
And he was the one chosen to put this information out there.
What is it?
What are the Twitter files?
It's the evidence of the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story, the internal documents and emails as being provided by Elon Musk's team to the public at large that show there was interference from the U.S. government on behalf of that power to suppress the First Amendment, which is a violation of the law, however you want to cut it or look at it.
And even though we knew all these things, and it really is kind of a nothing burger because it's like, tell me something I don't know, to have the proof and the evidence is a big deal.
Now, why is Elon doing this?
Well, a lot of people are making a lot of ventures as to why he's releasing this information right now.
The first thing I hear on the internet as I'm scrolling around and I'm seeing people talk about all this, I'm seeing a lot of people saying that Elon's only doing this because he's trying to take heat off of the fact, change the narrative away from the fact that he's gone censor-happy and started basically censoring people off the platform,
and he's gone completely the opposite direction of his free speech approach to Twitter, where now he's saying 20% of the country is not entitled to free speech, and that only 80% of the country should even have free speech at all,
and making these crazy, completely subjective and making these crazy, completely subjective decisions to censor individuals like Kanye West, who, whether you like him or not, or agree with him or disagree with him, should have the right to speak the truth as he sees it, but not allowed on Twitter.
So, a lot of people are saying this is all an attempt to divert attention away from what's happening with Kanye.
Kanye's pointing out his connections to Ari Emanuel.
You know, the super agent in Hollywood who brokered the deal with Elon to buy Twitter, who's been accused and alleged to be a handler of a lot of very high-end, high-value talent in Hollywood.
Another person of the Jewish faith, which you can't say these things or else you get canceled and called an anti-Semite.
As Kanye pointed it, though...
He didn't put it eloquently, but he pointed out the fact that there is a Jewish mafia and that they run certain industries, especially industries in Hollywood.
So is it a coincidence that he and Elon Musk work together on deals and that he's censoring Kanye West now after Ari Emanuel called to censor Kanye West and for companies to ditch him after he came out with his remarks about the mafia that he's calling out for running most of Hollywood?
I don't know.
Who knows, right?
It could be a number of different things as well, but it's interesting at the minimum to look at.
So let's just go through it, right?
So we're just going to go through all these.
I don't want to waste any more time going through all the different theories that are out there.
We'll let you decide for yourself.
You guys let me know in the comments what you think.
The Twitter files, Matt Tybee giving us the rendition here.
Saying, when you're about to read this, or what you're about to read, is the first installment in a series.
So I guess you could call this episode one, based upon thousands of internal documents obtained by sources at Twitter.
The Twitter files tell an incredible story from inside one of the world's largest and most influential social media platforms.
It is a Frankensteinian tale of a human-built mechanism grown out...
Grown out of the control of its designer, I think it's a typo, Twitter in its conception was a brilliant tool for enabling instant mass communication, making a true real-time global conversation possible for the first time.
In an early conception, Twitter more than lived up to its mission statement, giving people the power to create and share ideas and information instantly without barriers.
As time progressed, however, the company was slowly forced to add those barriers.
Some of the first tools for controlling speech were designed to combat the likes of spam and financial fraudsters.
Slowly over time, Twitter staff and executives began to find more and more uses for these tools out there.
Outsiders began petitioning the company to manipulate speech as well, first a little, then more often, then constantly.
By 2020, requests from connected actors.
So this, ladies and gentlemen, this is where it gets interesting.
This is the part where you're pretty much going to want to start paying attention.
This is the part where you see documented evidence being given out freely by Twitter of the quote-unquote Biden team petitioning the folks working at Twitter to censor and delete individuals' pages for their sharing of information.
Watch this.
It says, by 2020, requests from connected actors to delete tweets were routine.
One executive would write to another, more to review from the Biden team, quote-unquote.
The reply would come back handled.
Here it is.
So you can see for yourself, clearly the emails are, you know, right here.
They're plain as day, easy to see and read.
And this is all coming from the internal staff at Twitter.
This is all being released by Elon Musk now.
So that's one.
Now the next thing, celebrities.
And I just want to point out that inside of this tweet, you can see the names of the people who were censored.
There's this JSJX2. And let me see if I can pull up.
I had this earlier, and I'm going to see if I can pull this up because I think it is important to note who or what these people were sharing today.
Hope I'm going to be able to find this...
Sorry, there's so much information to go through.
I'm trying to get it all in real time.
I guess I'll just describe it to you because it doesn't really matter.
There's not a whole lot to see other than...
Let me explain.
These people like JSJX2 and Guy Squigs, the posts that were shared on other social media platforms, one of the posts, and I believe it was by the JSJX2 account, Was a picture of Hunter Biden with a camera, a phone camera, looking into a mirror with no pants on.
Obviously, it was blurred out.
Thanks be to God.
I don't want to see any of this garbage, this evil, despicable, sick stuff.
But he doesn't have his pants on.
And in the background, he obviously looks like he's in a hotel room or something.
And in the background, you can see...
There's a sliding glass door and there's a drape and there's a head poking out from behind the drape as if somebody's standing on the patio of that hotel room looking back into the room and it looks to be a severely underage woman or a girl I should say.
And that is just one example of the stuff that we're seeing here.
They were internally writing to each other that the Biden team had requested that they handle these issues.
So that's just one.
Let's go on.
Celebrities and unknowns alike could be removed or reviewed at the behest of a political party.
Here is one other example saying, I grabbed the first one under SI, defer to safety on the high profile second one, and it gives more reports.
And here's the important part.
It says, an additional report from who is this?
The DNC, the Democratic National Convention, was making requests in Twitter to censor who?
Is that real James Woods?
You guys know James Woods' account over on Twitter.
If you don't know, he's a prolific actor, but he's also a prolific tweeter who has been an outspoken conservative Republican, and he has been calling out these people from day one.
He is a very, very, you know, whatever you want to call it, based individual, right?
It goes on.
It gets worse, right?
It says, and you can see by the donations there what that is referring to the
resulting slant in content moderation decisions is visible In the documents you're about to read, however, it's also the assessment of multiple current and former high-level executives.
Now, this is where there's a lot of interesting speculation.
As you can see in this thread, there is a thread that is marked 12.
So we've had 12 posts up to this point in this thread.
The very next post says, okay, there was more throat clearing about the process, but screw it, let's jump forward.
So what that means, I believe, is that because it jumps from there all the way up to 16, which means 13, 14, and 15 were obviously scrubbed from this thread.
Now, why would they scrub three posts from this thread?
I think it's obvious there were high-ranking individuals on Twitter whose names were being thrown around that they didn't want to get out there, and probably other high-ranking individuals who lawyers and teams of lawyers at Twitter that are consulting with Elon and everyone else are saying, if you put this information out there, you're going to have lawsuits, you're going to have people jumping down your throat.
So maybe that's coming in episode two, because they're very clear at the end of this thread, this is only episode one, there's going to be multiple episodes of this information coming out.
I don't know.
We'll probably cover episode two tomorrow if it comes out, but we'll see.
It goes on, so we jump from 12 to 16 here, and it says, the Twitter files, part one.
How and why Twitter blocked the Hunter Biden laptop story.
So this is the first episode, if you will, of this whole thing, right?
It's talking about the Hunter Biden laptop story.
So if this is how they're going to put it out there, that means the Hunter Biden laptop cover-up is just the first of the many stories they're going to uncover now.
Again, I don't trust Elon Musk.
I'm going to make this so incredibly clear for everyone out there.
Don't trust him.
Don't believe a word he says.
I think he's playing both sides.
I think he's obviously still a transhumanist.
He works with the globalists.
He wants to work with the communist Chinese who persecute Christians.
He quotes the scripture and he doesn't believe in God, it seems.
So this guy, in my opinion, he's a wannabe antichrist.
He has a God complex.
He has all of those tendencies and psychological problems that you would imagine somebody in his position would have.
And I don't trust him for a minute.
If you don't like that, that's fine.
I remember I saw somebody saying, oh, Elon Musk totally is dunking on all the black pillars tonight.
It's like, no.
No, no, no, no.
Don't trust this guy for one second.
Everything he's doing is calculated for a reason.
If he's doing this, he's doing it because he's trying to amplify the platform.
He's trying to make it bigger.
He's trying to make more money.
He's trying to get more control.
He wants to put a brain chip in your head through Neuralink so that you can, you know, connect to your Twitter and tweet through your brain.
But then Twitter, he's going to turn into WeChat, which is the Chinese version of an all-encompassing social media financial app, which will then be connected to your social credit score so they can have a control system just like in China where they remove your humanity and make you into a walking computer.
But I digress.
Let's go on.
Part 1.
How and why the Twitter block the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Here it is.
October 14, 2020, New York Post published Biden's secret emails and expose based on the contents of Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop.
There's a link to the New York Post article right there.
Twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and posting warnings that it may be unsafe.
They even blocked its transmission via direct message, a tool hitherto reserved for extreme cases, i.e.
child porn.
Now, let me be very clear.
I have a vested interest in this story as much as anyone else because it was my channel along with many others with whom I've sued YouTube and Google to try to get our channels reinstated where the day after that story broke and the day after we started covering these stories, October 15, 2020, we were all nuked into oblivion, and the next level of censorship, the next iteration was imposed upon us.
So that's why I'm very passionate about this story as well.
So...
This is definitely getting interesting.
Let's get into the rest.
White House spokeswoman Kayleigh McEnany was locked out of her account for tweeting about the story prompting a furious letter from Trump campaign staffer Mike Hahn, who seethed, at least pretend to care for the next 20 days.
Here it is.
It's talking about Kayleigh McEnany.
Being locked out from her Twitter account for simply talking about the New York Post story.
All she did was cite the story in firsthand reporting that has been reported by other outlets and not disputed by the Biden campaign.
I need an answer immediately on when, how she will be unlocked.
I also don't appreciate how nobody on this team called me regarding the news, that you'll be censoring news articles, like I said, at least pretend to care for the next 20 days.
So they're calling them out to their face, right?
On the censorship from Trump's own team saying, you guys are just nakedly abusing the system to censor content in order to affect the outcome of an election.
So it's not like them putting their finger on the scale to tip it in their favor.
It's like them just grabbing the scale, smashing it against the wall, putting a gun to your head, and saying, the scale says this.
That's what it is more like.
But we read on.
Let's keep going.
Here in the next post, it says, this led policy executive Caroline Strum to send out a polite WTF query.
Several employees noted that there was tension between the comms policy teams who had little less control over moderation and the safety trust teams.
Excuse me.
It says, hi, team.
Are you able to take a closer look here?
Thank you.
Huh.
Strom's note returned the answer that the laptop story had been removed for violation of the company's hacked materials policy.
Here they say, thanks for reaching out to us per checking the user was balanced by SiteIntegrity for violating our hacked materials policy.
Adding them here for further insights and guidelines.
Thanks.
Elaine Ong Soto.
Ops analysts, global escalation teams, who the hell are these people?
Who the hell is Elaine Ong Soto, and how the hell does she have the authority to censor a platform like Twitter?
It's insanity!
It is insanity.
And when they question internally, it sounds like these people were just working with impunity and ignoring their bosses and their counterparts.
They were just, oh, well, here it violated our hacked policy team.
Well, we're not going to explain how.
It just did, so shut up.
That's what we're dealing with here.
That's literally what this is.
It goes on.
It goes on.
It says, It says, have been the problem.
The decision was made at the highest levels of the company, but without the knowledge of CEO Jack Dorsey, with former head of legal policy and trust Vijaya Gad playing a key role.
Hmm.
It says they just freelanced it is how one former employee characterized the decision.
Quote, hacking was the excuse, but within a few hours pretty much everyone realized that wasn't going to hold, but no one had the guts to reverse it.
This is insane.
Talk about the inmates running the asylum.
They basically said, well, we knew that our censorship premised on the hacked materials wasn't going to stand, but we just kept doing it anyway because nobody's stopping us.
So literally, you have the government putting their hands up there and saying, oh, we can't censor anything and we can't do anything about it.
And the guys in the company are like, well, if we can get away with it, we're going to get away with it.
But it gets worse once we see the emails that confirm the government was the one behind pushing for the censorship.
Let's go on.
25 here, it says you can see the confusion in the following lengthy exchange, which ends up including GAD and former Trust and Safety Chief Yoel Roth.
Comms official Trenton Kennedy writes, quote, I'm struggling to understand the policy basis for marking this as unsafe.
He says, I'm struggling to understand the policy basis for marking this unsafe, and I think the best explainability argument for this externally would be that we're waiting to understand if this story is the result of hacked materials.
We'll face hard questions on this if we don't have some kind of solid reasoning for marking the link unsafe.
Also, it says, will we also mark similar stories as unsafe?
And it gave a reference to another story coming out from Fox News.
So they knew they were essentially violating the premise or the pretense of their whatever, you know, their rules, their internal rules and regulations, but they just kept doing it anyway.
And it goes on.
It gets worse.
By this point, it says here, by this point, everyone knew this was effed, said one former employee, but the response was essentially to err on the side of continuing to err.
Here it is.
Vijaya saying, what is the warning that will come up?
Yulroth knew when you click on the link, you'll see the generic unsafe URL message references spam malware and violations of Twitter rules.
Not ideal, but it's the only thing we have.
Ian Plunkett, Regardless of what you believe in or think, the truth of the matter is these people are criminals.
They are manipulating the algorithms.
They're censoring the content.
And you go, well, they're a private corporation.
They can do what they want.
Okay, so they can fix our elections.
That's totally fine.
They can basically censor information to manipulate 20 days outside of a general election to create this incredible suppression of information?
No.
I mean, this is insane, but it gets worse.
It gets worse.
Here it goes on, and it says, former VP of Global Communications Brandon Borman asks, can we truthfully claim that this is part of the policy?
He says, to Ian's point, can we truthfully claim this is part of the policy, i.e.
as part of our approach to addressing potentially hacked materials, we are limiting visibility of related stories on Twitter while our investigation is ongoing.
Huh.
Well, that's a good way to, you know, look at this.
I mean, you think?
Maybe there's a problem here?
I guess not.
To which the former Deputy General Counsel Jim Baker again seems to advise staying the non-course because caution is warranted.
Now, this is the best part, guys.
Who is James Baker?
Jim Baker.
Well, I recall he was in all those Q-drops, wasn't he?
And he was a part of the command structure at the FBI while they were trying to frame Trump with the Crossfire Hurricane investigations and while they were, you know, manipulating evidence to frame him for Trump for crimes he never committed.
And then he was hired on to the Twitter staff as being their head deputy general counsel, right?
Right.
So, this is what he says.
Let's watch.
And it's privileged and confidential, but let's read.
It says, Well,
doesn't this sound an awful lot like the letter that was penned by the 50 intelligence officials that said that this was most likely a Russian disinformation operation?
You guys remember that?
I do.
And those same people who are never, ever brought up on the crimes that they've committed in the past because they have immunity, because you can be a criminal as long as you work for the government, that they are the same people with Jim Baker who framed the president, who manufactured fake evidence, false evidence, and planted it to try to frame Trump.
They are the ones who signed off on the witch hunt investigations, and they are the ones that had tried to sabotage Trump from the moment he stepped into the White House.
So it's them and their ilk who are the ones here saying, well, it could have been hacked, but it could have not been hacked, but let's just err on the side of it was hacked.
So that makes sense, right?
It goes on and says, In one humorous exchange on day one, Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna reaches out to Gad 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, saying, generating huge backlash on Hillary's speech.
Have a chat if you're up for it.
Let's see how this exchange goes.
Gad replies quickly, immediately diving into the weeds of Twitter policy, unaware Khanna is more worried about the Bill of Rights.
Her reply to Congressman Khanna, Can you imagine...
You have a congressman, a Democrat nonetheless, reaching out and saying, yeah, I think we're going to have a problem here with free speech.
And the oblivious, arrogant, whatever you want to call it, nature of the Vajaya Gad, the lady who runs Twitter's Trust and Safety, the one that was on the Joe Rogan podcast with...
Jack Dorsey, where she said all those crazy things about, you know, just lying about the company in general.
She's the one telling the Congressman, you know, we just told the press secretary of the President of the United States, we told her that she had to delete her tweet about a factual story because we are interjecting our opinion that the content was hacked material.
Which they don't even have confirmation of at all at any point through all of this.
They're just making the supposition that the material was hacked.
How about that, right?
Goes on, it gets better.
Kana tries to reroute the conversation in the First Amendment mention, of which is generally hard to find in these files.
Ro Khanna Vijaya Gad says here, Hope you're well, Vijaya, but this seems to be a violation of the First Amendment principles.
If there is a hack of classified information or other information that could expose a serious war crime and the New York Times was to publish it, I think the New York Times should have the right.
A journalist should not be held accountable for the illegal actions of the source unless they actively aided the hack.
So...
To restrict the distribution of that material, especially regarding presidential candidates, seems not in keeping of the principles of NYTV Sullivan.
I say this as a total Biden partisan and convinced he didn't do anything wrong.
But the story now has become more about censorship than relatively innocuous emails, and it's become a bigger deal than it would have been.
It also is now leading to serious efforts to curtail Section 230, many of which would have been a mistake.
Did you hear that?
She's commending Twitter on the censorship of U.S. citizens for speaking out against these sick, demonic, satanic, evil pedophiles who are hurting children.
Isn't that wonderful?
Isn't that the world you want to live in?
Because I know it's the world we live in regardless of whether you want to live in it or not.
Going on, it says, in the heat of the presidential campaign, restricting dissemination of newspaper articles, even if New York Post is far right, seems like it will invite more backlash than it will do good.
Please keep this communication between just us and Jack.
No need to CC the team or forward it to them.
Just wanted to offer my two cents.
Well, thank you for your two cents.
Maybe you should have said something publicly, Kana.
I don't recall hearing anybody named Kana saying anything about that from the Democrat side.
Just giving your two cents, you know?
That's nice.
All right.
All right.
Within a day, head of public policy Lauren Colbertson receives a ghastly letter report from Carl Sosbo of the research firm NetChoice, which had already polled 12 members of Congress, nine Republicans, three Democrats from the House Judiciary Committee.
It's basically them saying they did that.
Here, I'm going to play it.
They polled, basically, so within a day, they were polling Democrats and Republicans in Congress about whether or not they thought this was right.
It goes on to say, NetChoice lets Twitter know that a bloodbath 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.
And wasn't that what they wanted at the end of the day anyway?
Sosbo reports to Twitter that some Hill figures are characterizing the laptop story as text access Hollywood moment.
It goes on.
Twitter files continued.
The First Amendment is an absolute.
Sosbo's letter contains chilling passages relating Democratic lawmakers' attitudes.
They want more moderation.
And as for the Bill of Rights, it's not absolute.
Read this.
Let's read this.
The Democrats, meanwhile, complain that the companies are inept.
They let conservatives muddy the water and make the Biden campaign look corrupt, even though Biden is innocent.
They linked this to Hillary Clinton's email scandal.
She did nothing wrong, but because the press wouldn't let the story go, it became a scandal far out of proportion.
In their mind, social media is doing the same thing.
It doesn't moderate enough harmful content, so when it does, like it did yesterday, it becomes a story.
If the companies moderated more, conservatives wouldn't even think to use social media for disinformation, misinformation, or otherwise.
The Democrats were in agreement.
Social media needs to moderate more because they're corrupting democracy and making all truth relative.
When pushed on how the government might insist on that, consistent with the First Amendment, they demurred the First Amendment isn't absolute.
That's how they look at us, folks.
That's how they think of us.
That's how they think of our rights.
Our rights are not absolute.
Our rights are contingent upon their relative truth, right?
That they want to put out there because they can't handle free speech because the free speech is a challenge to their authoritarian regime, which is being imposed upon us whether we like it or not.
A few more posts here.
An amazing subplot to 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 un-F'd, as one ex-employee put it, even after Dorsey jumped in.
There are multiple instances of the files of Dorsey interviewing or intervening to question suspensions and other moderation actions for accounts across the political spectrum.
The problem with the hacked materials ruling, several sources said, was that this normally required an official law enforcement finding of a hack, But such a finding never appears throughout what one executive describes as a whirlwind 24-hour company-wide mess.
Here it is.
Hi, owls.
I wonder what owls is standing for.
You know, they all worship Moloch, so that's an owl.
As you probably are aware, Twitter actioned tweets yesterday relating to New York Post articles that were tweeted out that allegedly included pictures and screenshots of emails from a laptop that allegedly belonged to Hunter Biden, presidential candidate Joe Biden's son.
Our team made the determination that the materials fall under our hacked materials policy in addition to sharing personal information, so links were actioned.
As you may know, this existing policy framework was launched in 2018 to mitigate real-time harm based on hacked and leaked scenarios coming out of the 2016 election.
It's almost...
I mean, like when you read through these things, it's almost like the whole thing was fixed from the get-go.
Like they spent four years on figuring out how they could not only fix the election, but then shut down anybody's ability to question their manipulation of elections, and then to censor and shut down free speech on the Internet in its entirety so that they could steal power and then to censor and shut down free speech on the Internet in its entirety so that I mean, look, I'm only going to say this because it's the truth.
At what point do we take action against these individuals for what they've done?
And I'll leave that to your imagination to decide what that action should be.
But these people are sick and evil.
And that's the best way I could put it.
Several high-profile accounts, including press outlets, were impacted by this decision and were actioned.
Unfortunately, the language that was provided in the product may have created confusion.
Oh, really?
On purpose, as you can tell, indicating the links were spam or unsafe.
Consequently, Twitter's safety explained the reasoning here in a thread.
This morning, New York Post tweeted additional links to the stories that contained pictures and screenshots of emails that were also actions.
The teams determined that a Trump campaign tweet that previously was actioned for containing PPI would not be reactioned when it was retweeted without the PPI blurred.
Personal information, I guess.
It says...
I know there are questions that you probably have and are also probably getting a lot of incoming stakeholders, governmental, academics, civil society, etc.
The last 24 hours certainly has been a whirlwind with lots of curves and unknowns, and we fully expect that the issues surrounding this material will continue to swirl in the coming days.
So thank you to everybody for your patience.
Oh, thanks for your patience.
Cooperating with the suppression of information, totally, totally reasonable.
It goes on here.
He goes on and he says, So there you go.
That is essentially, as far as I can tell, That's the end.
So that's part one, episode one of the Twitter files leak or cover-up exposed that's coming out of the Twitter sphere.
A few things to look at.
Some people pointing this out.
Obviously, Syrian girl over on Twitter saying Kanye's last tweet was a photo of Elon Musk with Ari Emanuel, an Israeli-American billionaire, who is also referred to as Hollywood superagent.
He brokered the deal for Elon's purchase of Twitter.
He called for businesses to cancel Kanye West.
He's the son of an Ergon terrorist.
And yeah, there you go.
look for yourself.
So I don't know what the connections are and And look, people go, oh, well, this is not the time to talk about Elon Musk, to talk negatively about him.
Well, you know what?
Sorry.
It's just the truth.
I'm not going to sit here and act like Elon Musk is this great guy.
I mean, he's coming out and saying things that...
Look, I understand he's trying to...
I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Maybe he's trying his best.
But it's just, how do you have a guy telling us about free speech in one hand while he's censoring the platform?
He tells us, oh, I'm going to make it a free speech platform, and then he censors the people on it, like Kanye West.
Now, I don't agree with everything Kanye West says, but as a person who's been censoring myself for doing nothing wrong, yeah, maybe we should have free speech.
Maybe we shouldn't let people be relegated into the digital gulags and be okay with it, no matter what they say, because I am a free speech absolutist.
Because when Elon says stuff like this, it's just a joke to me, right?
He's responding to one of the things here where he talks about handled.
He says if this isn't a violation of the Constitution's First Amendment, what is?
And then he says Twitter acting by itself to suppress free speech is not a First Amendment violation, but acting under orders from the government to suppress free speech with no judicial review is.
Oh, well, thanks, Elon.
So what he's saying is that if he wants to manipulate and push and tip the scales because he owns the company, he's allowed to.
And if you're okay with that, that's fine.
But if you're not okay with it, like myself, and you actually believe in free speech, and you think that these companies like Twitter and YouTube and Facebook are monopolies who have complete and total control over the digital space for platforms, that the digital town square, if you will, and they should not be able to suppress free speech and that we should all be able to speak equally and have access to the same freedoms, then that's where I am, okay?
If you think it's okay that these sick, demonic, twisted people, and when I say demonic, yes, Elon Musk is a Satanist.
Why?
I don't know.
Maybe because he wears the devil's champion armor around with a picture of Baphomet on his chest and an upside-down cross and then quotes scripture, uses scripture out of context and quotes it to go after Christians, to persecute Christians.
Maybe, yeah, he is a demonic, satanic, evil loser.
And I'm not going to sit here and be like, oh, he's so brave for coming out and showing...
Look, it's the cognitive dissonance he's creating here.
It should be clear to most of you, but if it's not clear, what he's essentially doing is he's saying, look, I'm allowing free speech on my platform as he censors the speech he doesn't like.
I'm exposing the government collusion to censor free speech as he has a monopoly on free speech access and decides only 80% of free speech should be allowed.
If you think that's okay, that's fine, but I don't.
And I'll never sign off on this.
So that's where I'm going to go ahead and leave it.
We're going to wrap it up with the most important part of our day, our God's Grace is Greater segment.
And I'm just going to go ahead and read in chapter 13 of Mark.
And what we're going to do is we're just going to read the...
The first two verses of chapter 13 to get started there because we're going through all four Gospels.
We started on Matthew.
We are going through Mark.
We're going to go through Luke and John.
You know our God's grace is greater than we do at the end of every episode.
Today we're starting chapter 13, going through verse 1 and 2, and we're just going to talk about it real quick.
It says,"...as he was going out of the temple complex..." As he was going out of the temple complex, one of his disciples said to him, Teacher, look!
What massive stones!
What impressive buildings!
Jesus said to him, Do you see these great buildings?
One stone will be left here on another that will not be thrown down.
So there's a few ways to essentially read this, right?
The first is that Jesus is telling him, he's basically foretelling, prophesying the destruction of the temple, which comes, I believe, around 40 AD, right?
The destruction of the temple in Jerusalem.
But beyond that, Imagine what's happening here.
Jesus is with his disciples and they're standing outside the temple complex and they're looking at this grand temple.
I mean, some of these stones in this temple complex weigh as much as a private jet, right?
And the disciples are looking at this magnificent temple and they're thinking in their minds how glorious it's going to be when we are sitting in the temple and we're ruling with Jesus over all these people.
So they're setting their mind on earthly things, right?
And they're telling Jesus, how grand is it going to be when we're inside the temple with the massive stones and this impressive building?
But what does Jesus tell them?
He says, do you see this great building here?
He says, there will not be one stone left that hasn't been thrown down.
Not only prophesying the destruction of the temple, but prophesying and telling his disciples that we're not going to reign from a temple.
We're going to reign from the kingdom of heaven.
He tells them in the next few parts of Mark that we're going to read in chapter 13 of the persecution that they're going to face.
And he tells them to be ready for it.
But what Jesus is ultimately telling us and telling his disciples here is that he will reign from the kingdom of heaven.
It's not going to be a kingdom here on earth.
The disciples were expecting Jesus to ride into battle on a horse with a sword and strike down Caesar and free the people of Israel and do these great things that they imagine in their mind as what the Messiah should do.
But Jesus had different plans.
He was going to do the one thing that nobody expected.
He was going to sacrifice himself so that me and you could have a chance at eternal life, which is far more valuable than all the riches of the world, all the power of the world, the temples and the fame and the glory.
It would mean nothing in comparison.
To the eternal salvation that we've already been given through the sacrifice made on the cross.
And how do you get it?
Simple.
All you have to do is turn your life over to Jesus, let him into your heart, and ask him to show you the way.
That's the starting point.
So that's where I'm going to go ahead and leave it.
We'll wrap it up with a prayer, and then we'll sign off.
We'll do our thing where we go through the chat and see what you guys have to say.
Lord and Heavenly Father, thank you so much for this day, and thank you for all your many great blessings.
Lord, we pray that you'll help us to remember where the kingdom of God comes from, where the power comes from, your kingdom, Lord, that it comes from heaven.
There's an amazing sacrifice made for our sinful lives to give us eternal salvation, to help us cleanse ourselves of the sin that we have inside of our hearts.
Lord, we pray that we cleanse ourselves with the blood of Jesus that was shed for our benefit.
Lord, we give thanks for that.
We pray everyone out there watching would find that in their hearts and understand and trust and know it.
And Lord, we thank you most of all for our eternal salvation.
In Jesus' name, amen.
All right, guys.
Well, we're going to go ahead and read through what you guys have to say about it all.
But if that's where we're going to sign off over on BitChute, that's where I'm going to say like, share, subscribe.
I'll see you tomorrow.
Probably if there's a new episode of the Twitter files, we'll go through it.
If not, we'll just do our normal show.
But be ready for another live stream tomorrow.
But until then, my name is Craig.
▲
Export Selection