DHS LEAKS PROVE Government Conspiracy With Twitter, Big Tech, To Censor And Subvert Elections
DHS LEAKS PROVE Government Conspiracy With Twitter, Big Tech, To Censor And Subvert Elections. The shocking leaks expose a massive conspiracy and may be due to Elon Musk's Twitter take over.
The documents reveal Vijaya Gadde had been meeting with Feds and advocating for government control of information. The report also shows the FBI intervened to Facebook ultimately resulting in the Hunter Biden laptop story being Censored.
With the midterms less than a week away the information here shows we may be facing the true end of the republic. This is one of the biggest stories in US history and of our Lives.
The Biden administration is directly implicated in supporting, advocating for, and trying to shield this degree of extreme corruption.
#elonmusk
#biden
#twitter
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In our first story, in what may be one of the biggest stories of our lives, evidence that the government has been colluding with big tech to censor and subvert our elections has just been made public.
Communications, documents, and proof that executives at companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Microsoft were meeting regularly with the government to determine what to censor.
Now, we've known this has been going on because of lawsuits, but more information just got dropped, and it's confirmed.
In our next story, Elon Musk leaks evidence that Twitter may have committed fraud, lying about bots, plans to lay off 25% of the workforce.
And in our last story, The Atlantic writes, it's time for COVID amnesty.
You must forgive us for what we did during the lockdown.
Everybody's saying, no way.
If you like the show, give us a good review and leave us five stars.
Share the show with your friends.
Now, let's get into that first story.
Welcome, my friends, to another rare live session on the Tim Pool YouTube channel.
This story that we have breaking, evidence of government conspiracy with big tech to manipulate news, manufacture consent, and yes, even subvert elections.
It is now definitive, reported by The Intercept, one of the biggest stories of our lives, potentially the biggest story of our lives, and one of the biggest stories in the history of the United States.
I can't believe it.
I mean, it's 2pm, and here I am doing another livestream just following the Friday stream.
I don't normally do this, but this news is so massive, I had to go live as soon as I could.
And I wanted to give some breathing room to the segment I just put up on my other channel.
But this is it.
Let me stress again, the Intercept has dropped hard evidence, text messages, documents showing the Biden administration has been coordinating censorship efforts with Twitter, Facebook, Microsoft, Big Tech to manipulate public opinion, to control narratives on racial justice, COVID and potential and the election in 2020.
It's here.
Now, I know most of you are probably saying, many of you are probably saying, we knew this.
And you're correct.
I have a tweet from Benny Johnson.
You had Jen Psaki outright saying the government was working on some of these proposals.
We've known about this passively.
But all along the way, you've had big media saying, no, no, no, you misunderstand what's happening.
It's not collusion.
It's not censorship.
Now it's here.
Vijaya Gade, just fired by Elon Musk, was reported to have been having regular meetings with the Feds to discuss censorship activities.
And there it is.
Now naturally, you know, the first thing I did when I saw the story was I immediately I'm spamming Joe Rogan like, Dude!
We sat down across from this person who lied to our faces!
And the American public.
And this is probably why Vijay Agade cried when the news broke about Elon Musk buying the platform.
This is also likely why we got reporting that the Biden administration, the federal government, was potentially seeking to intervene to stop Elon Musk from acquiring Twitter.
Elon already, just last night, leaked evidence that the Twitter board was withholding information from the courts.
Now, that was big.
But that's a civil issue.
I gotta say, my friends, did I call it or did I call it when I said, and many of you probably heard me say this...
Elon Musk went to buy the platform and what did he see?
National security letters or something to that effect.
And now we're seeing there were direct communications between executives at Twitter and other companies with FBI agents, with DHS, with what's called CISA.
C-I-S-A.
I wonder if Elon Musk got this information pre-sale and said, I can't get involved in this.
I wonder.
Maybe not.
Maybe not.
But I think two big things.
Let me stress again, for everybody who's coming into this story right now, this may be one of the biggest stories of our lives, it is potentially the biggest story of our lives, and it is likely one of the biggest stories in U.S.
history.
The federal government was colluding with media platforms to manufacture consent and subvert our elections.
It's here.
Intercept.
Newsguard certified with hard documents.
Here's what I think.
I think the reason this is coming out is twofold.
One, they know they're going to lose.
In the next week or so.
And this means you're going to get a bunch of MAGA Republicans on committees dumping this information, demanding inquiries, filing subpoenas.
People are going to get in serious trouble.
Get it out now.
But more importantly, with Elon Musk acquiring Twitter, they likely knew this was coming.
And so they said, get it out now, get it out fast, get ahead of it.
The best thing they could do, get ahead of it.
Wait till you see some of this stuff.
Let me just, let me give you a sampler, because I want to make sure there's, you know, we're a couple minutes into this, and I want to make sure people are aware of exactly what we're seeing right now.
Look at this.
Facebook and Twitter created special portals for the government to rapidly request takedowns.
The emails and documents show that Twitter's Vijaya Gade was meeting monthly with the DHS for censorship plans, even advocating, saying more platforms need to get on board with this.
I hope you are ready for this one, my friends, because this is big.
Okay.
All right.
The last time I did this stream, I forgot to press record, and I forgot to press it again.
So, we'll see.
We'll see.
We'll get this one done.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com.
Become a member if you want to support our work directly.
As a member, you'll get access to the exclusive uncensored show.
We're going to have one up tonight.
We're going to have a lot more information on this, hopefully by 8 p.m.
when we're on TimCast IRL with our guests.
Obviously then we'll be joined by Luke, Ian, and we have a guest for tonight.
Become a member to support our journalists, support our work.
It means a lot.
We could use your help.
Our journalists could use your help.
And we've got the team researching this and working on it right now as I am doing this segment live.
So support us.
Smash the like button.
You can follow me on Twitter at TimCast.
And without further ado, Let's read this story from The Intercept.
Also, I will be reading many of your Super Chats, so if you're watching live, you can Super Chat, and we'll get to that.
It's from Ken Klippenstein and Li Fang, published at 5 a.m.
this morning.
I'll try to get through this quickly and show you the hard documents, but here we go.
You got a problem with it, YouTube?
Take it up with your buddies over at the DHS.
down there a minute. I always want to make sure I do this.
The Intercept is News Guard certified, does not publish false content. 87.5
out of 100. You got a problem with it, YouTube? Take it up with your buddies over
at the DHS. Here we go.
The Department of Homeland Security is quietly broadening its efforts to curb
speech it considers dangerous. An investigation by The Intercept is found.
Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, as well as public documents, illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms.
This is not just about leaked documents.
This is Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmidt, who launched a lawsuit and got much of this released.
Take a look at this.
The work, much of which remains unknown to the American public, came into clearer view earlier this year when DHS announced a new Disinformation Governance Board, a panel designed to police misinformation.
Misinformation and disinformation.
Now, they define this.
Misinformation is false information spread unintentionally, whereas disinformation is intentionally spread.
And malinformation, which is factual information shared typically out of context with harmful intent.
That allegedly threatens U.S.
interests.
While the board was widely ridiculed, immediately scaled back, and then shut down within a few months, other initiatives are underway at DHS as DHS pivots to monitoring social media now that its original mandate, the War on Terror, has been wound down.
All of this predicted by many anti-establishment individuals, Republicans only truly coming to understand the scale of this recently.
Behind closed doors and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S.
government has used its power to try and shape online discourse, according to meeting minutes and other records appended to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmidt, a Republican who is also running for Senate.
Discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information.
We did know a lot about this, but this is hard evidence coming out, directly implicating a ton of people.
Take a look at this.
DHS Cybersecurity Disinformation Meeting Minutes.
This is CISA, Cybersecurity Advisory Committee.
Protecting critical infrastructure from misinformation and disinformation.
Who we are.
CISA has a burgeoning MDM effort that focuses on building national resilience through public awareness.
CISA engages with subject matter experts, researchers, think tanks, and public relations experts to understand the threat of MDM, misinformation, disinformation, malinformation.
Develop strategies to message to the public and amplify trusted voices.
All of this is in direct violation of the Constitution, hands down.
All right, all right, all right.
We've got a lot more to read from the DHS, but let me show you some cliff notes from Lee Fang.
He tweeted out, Documents show Facebook and Twitter closely collaborating with the Department of Homeland Security and FBI to police disinformation.
Plans to expand censorship on topics like the withdrawal from Afghanistan, origins of COVID, Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
unidentified
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first-ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit Moms4America.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
Info that undermines trust in financial institutions.
Take a look at this.
FBI agent Laura Demlo was in communications with Facebook that led to the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story in 2020 over the false allegation that it was disinfo.
This year she met with Twitter DHS to stress we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.
Take a look at this.
This one's from the lawsuit.
It says, Pursuant to the third party subpoena, Meta has identified the FBI's FITF as supervised by Laura Demlo and Elvis Chan as involved in the communications between the FBI and Meta that led to Facebook's suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Here we can see, in the internal meeting minutes, they say, there was discussion between team members related to organizational information sharing between public and private sector, how to collaborate across channels, driving resiliency, building an education about MDM, with FBI focused on foreign efforts, how do we disentangle foreign actors embedded with the MDM process, and what is the government strategic approach related to MDM.
Ms.
Demlow was asked to provide her thoughts or to divine a goal for approaching MDM, and she mentioned resiliency.
She stated we needed a media infrastructure that is held accountable.
We need to early educate the populace, and that today, critical thinking seems to be a problem currently.
You think?
Redacted Senior Advisor for Homeland Security and Director of the Defending Democratic Institution Center for Strategic and International Studies, CSIS, stated that civics education should be provided at all ages.
He says Facebook and Twitter created special portals for the government to rapidly request takedowns of content.
The portals, along with NGO partners, used to censor a wide range of content, including obvious parody accounts and content disagreeing with government pandemic policy.
Protected actions.
First Amendment protected actions.
The government was colluding with big tech to get taken down.
We know Because we already heard from Jen Psaki.
In this video, Benny Johnson posted, he said, remember when Psaki said the quiet part out loud last year and admitted to flagging problematic posts for big tech censors?
Well, big tech platforms just got caught colluding with the Biden regime through special portals to take down wrong content.
Take a look at this one in a leaked text message.
Lee Fang reports, the emails and documents show close collaboration, but BW?
DHS and private sector.
Twitter's Vajayagati, fired by Elon Musk last week, met monthly with DHS to discuss censorship plans.
Microsoft executive texted DHS, platforms have got to get comfortable with government.
So, I'm not sure if this text is saying, okay, so this is a Microsoft exec, not Twitter executive?
They say, Twitter's Vajayagati met monthly with DHS.
Here's what it says.
The blue, we're assuming, is from the federal government.
The grey, in this text message, coming from, I guess he's saying Microsoft.
Or, or there's, or, okay, I'm sorry, I believe this is from Vijaya.
Is that what it's saying?
Let me read it.
It says, thanks so much, really appreciate it, and sorry I didn't ring last week.
Think you were on the call this week, just trying to get us in a place where feds can work with platforms to better understand the miss and diss trends, so relevant agencies can try to pre-bunk, debunk as useful.
Not our mission, but was looking to play a coordinated role, so not every DA is independently reaching out to platforms, which could cause a lot of chaos.
The response was on the call.
The coordination is greatly appreciated.
Was disappointed that platforms, including us, didn't offer more.
We'll get there.
And sector leadership had zero questions.
We'll get there, and that kind of leadership really helps.
Platforms have got to get more comfortable with government.
It's really interesting how hesitant they remain.
Again, Microsoft included.
I don't believe it makes sense that message came from Microsoft if they're saying... Okay, I guess it is.
If it's a Microsoft executive saying Microsoft included, makes sense.
He's saying, like, we too should be doing a better job.
So, I don't know where he's saying that Twitter's Vijay Gadde in this met monthly with the DHS to discuss censorship plans, but he is reporting it definitively.
He says, how does DHS justify its evolving mission from countering foreign terror groups
to policing domestic disinfo on social media?
Leaked planning docs show the agency argues false information is a source of radicalization
and violence.
None of that gives the government the right to go to the private sector and censor legitimate information.
I remind you that in this reporting about the Hunter Biden laptop story getting taken down, that story is True, confirmed by numerous mainstream publications, the U.S.
government intervened and got legitimate information shut down.
This is downright insane.
All right, man.
Yo, I got a lot more to show you on this one.
Let's go back to the story from DHS.
I wanted to make sure I got to some of these documents, but take a look at this.
They say this is a... Here's a quote.
Platforms have got to get comfortable with government.
It's really interesting how hesitant they are.
Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director.
So that text that we just read.
That was the blue part was from a DHS director with Microsoft outright saying we need to get more people on board with this.
Direct collusion between Big Tech and the government to violate the First Amendment among many others.
Censor and suppress information now confirmed.
Who's getting sued?
Who's getting hauled before these hearings?
Well, They must be trying to get in front of this.
Take a look at this.
In a March meeting, Laura Demlo, an FBI official, warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S.
government.
And?
That's kind of a whole thing we have here in the United States about our right to speak out against you and your corruption.
Codified in the First Amendment.
It was the third article of the original 17, which eventually became the Bill of Rights.
It is still number one.
Demlo, according to notes of the discussion attended by senior executives from Twitter and JPMorgan Chase, stressed that we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.
Quote, We do not coordinate with other entities when making content moderation decisions, and we independently evaluate content in line with the Twitter rules, a spokesperson for Twitter wrote in a statement to The Intercept.
Now, I gotta say, it's no surprise all this is coming out now that Elon has acquired Twitter.
They are going to nuke Twitter.
They're burning the thing down as they exit.
I think it's only a matter of time before Elon became apprised of these communications and then made them public.
They had no choice but to release it.
But let me show you this.
U.S.
government is considering a national security review of Elon Musk's 44 billion Twitter acquisition report says.
If it happens, Biden could ultimately kill the deal.
Now, I wonder why it would be that the federal government was seeking to intervene to block the purchase of Twitter by Elon Musk.
Ultimately, they did not do it.
It would seem they could not do it.
For what national security reason could you justify?
I'll break it down for you.
My hypothesis.
I don't have access to this information, but here's what I think.
I mentioned this.
Elon Musk probably came into this Twitter deal in good faith.
They said, here's government communications, a national security letter, you cannot disclose.
And Elon said, yo, I'm not buying into this.
And they said, too bad.
If you back out now, it will expose this.
And we're not taking that hit.
Maybe that didn't happen.
Maybe it did.
But here's what may have happened.
With them looking at Elon Musk trying to buy this, Vijay Agade's crying it was reported.
They don't want him to buy it.
Why?
All the evidence is coming out.
How do they stop him?
They can't.
Interestingly, Elon tried to back out.
Now why did they try to force the acquisition?
I don't know.
So maybe this didn't happen, okay?
I really don't know.
But the US government sought to stop this, ultimately choosing not to.
Here's what I think.
Elon, if a national security review was conducted, in fact, just this story alone implicates some kind of national security effort underway within Twitter's walls.
So when I saw this story, I said, did I call it or did I call it?
Twitter was worried that some kind of national security program, the U.S.
government was worried, some kind of national security program would be exposed.
They didn't go through with it.
Why?
They laid it out plain and simple.
It was happening.
Something was happening.
Maybe it's better that the communications leak, or maybe it's better they just get in front of it.
Here we are.
This was October 21st.
Ten days later, we now have these leaks.
I wonder if these leaks were intentional.
Because I had already said it.
Many people had already said it.
And Elon Musk was about to grab those documents and release them to the public.
So the only thing they can do is try and control what does get released.
Perhaps they can put the blame elsewhere.
Perhaps Joe Biden or whoever else can leak this selective information and then say, oh, look, it wasn't us.
I don't know where this goes, but this is huge.
I expect to see inquiries, letters, lawsuits.
This is nightmarish, I'll tell you that.
We've already known this because of stories like this from the Wall Street Journal, August 17th.
Twitter becomes a tool of government censorship.
Alex Berenson was kicked off the site at the White House's urging.
That's a violation of the First Amendment.
Well, how about this Wall Street Journal?
They were actively colluding on more than just that.
In fact, they were colluding in such a way that would subvert our elections, notably in 2020 with the Hunter Biden laptop story.
It is plain as day.
It is in front of us.
FACT!
REPORT!
LEAKED DOCUMENTS!
DEAL WITH IT, YOUTUBE!
Here we go.
There is also a formalized process for government officials to directly flag content on Facebook or Instagram and request that it be throttled or suppressed through a special Facebook portal that requires a government or law enforcement email to use.
Amazing!
Take a look at that.
writing, the content request system at Facebook, X takedown slash login is still live.
DHS and Meta, the parent company of Facebook did not respond to a request for comment.
The FBI declined to comment.
Take a look at that.
It's still live.
A DHS's mission, I like how they put the D in capital right there, to fight disinformation stemming from concerns
around Russian influence.
In the 2016 presidential election began taking shape during the 2020 election and over efforts to shape
discussions around vaccine policy during the coronavirus pandemic.
Documents collected by The Intercept from a variety of sources, including current officials and publicly available reports, reveal the evolution of more active measures by DHS.
I can only say bravo to The Intercept.
Not a big fan.
They got super woke.
Glenn Greenwald leaves, but this is massive.
But wait.
I don't trust them.
I don't.
And if this was a selective leak, I would not be surprised that it was selectively leaked to The Intercept.
Either way, the confirmation is huge.
And if it's being leaked because the corrupt entities within the U.S.
government that were colluding with corrupt entities at Big Tech are being exposed and they had no choice, so be it.
They say, according to a draft copy of DHS's Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, DHS's capstone report outlining the department's strategy and priorities in the coming years, the department plans to target inaccurate information on a wide range of topics, including the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S.
withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S.
support to Ukraine.
Absolutely amazing!
To support war?
War, war, war.
Racial justice?
And how about this?
Did y'all see...
Ben Shapiro coming out, livid last week, about how we were lied to about certain scientific studies pertaining to the vaccine.
A judge in New York stating definitively the vaccine does not stop transmission and that he was ordering back pay and the reinstating of many employees to their jobs who were fired over this saying the government didn't have the authority to do it.
Now you've got an article from the Atlantic saying, let's, COVID amnesty!
COVID amnesty!
No dice.
Quote, the challenge is particularly acute in marginalized communities, the report states,
which are often the targets of false or misleading information, such as false information on voting
procedures targeting people of color. My friends, what we have here is, simply put,
the government having secret meetings with major media corporations to manipulate public perception
of policy, of lockdowns, of the government's actions itself, in complete violation of everything this country stands for.
They're going to say the inclusion of the 2021 U.S.
withdrawal from Afghanistan is particularly noteworthy, given that House Republicans, should they take the majority in the midterms, have vowed to investigate.
Quote, This makes Benghazi look like a much smaller issue, said Rep.
Mike Johnson, a member of the Armed Services Committee, adding that finding answers will be a top priority.
How disinformation is defined by the government has not been clearly articulated, and the inherently subjective nature of what constitutes disinformation provides a broad opening for DHS officials to make politically motivated determinations about what constitutes dangerous speech.
DHS justifies these goals, which have expanded far beyond its original purview on foreign threats, to encompass disinformation originally.
I'm sorry, originating domestically, by claiming that terrorist threats can be exacerbated by misinformation and disinformation spread online.
But the laudable goal of protecting Americans from danger has often been used to conceal political maneuvering.
In 2004, for instance, DHS officials faced pressure from the George W. Bush administration to heighten the national threat level for terrorism in a bid to influence voters prior to the election, according to former DHS Secretary Tom Ridge.
officials have routinely lied about an array of issues, from the causes of its wars in Vietnam and Iraq, to the more recent obfuscation around the role of the National Institutes of Health in funding the Wuhan Institute of Virology Coronavirus Research.
Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating And affecting the 2024 presidential election.
We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
government from seeking to become arbiters of what constitutes false or dangerous information on inherently political topics.
Earlier this year, Republican Governor Ron DeSantis signed a law known by supporters as the Stop WOKE Act, which bans private employers from workplace trainings asserting an individual's moral character is privileged or oppressed based on his or her race or color, sex, or national origin.
The law, critics charged, amounted to a broad suppression of speech deemed offensive.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, or FIRE, has since filed a lawsuit against DeSantis alleging unconstitutional censorship.
A federal judge temporarily blocked parts of the Stop Woke Act, ruling the law had violated workers' First Amendment rights.
Funny.
I don't really know what that has to do with the federal government and the DHS, but let's read.
Florida's legislators may well find plaintiff's speech repugnant, but under our constitutional scheme, the remedy for repugnant speech is more speech, not enforced silence, wrote Judge Mark Walker in a colorful opinion castigating the law.
The extent to which the DHS initiatives affect Americans' daily social feeds is unclear.
During the 2020 election, the government flagged numerous posts as suspicious.
Many of which were taken down.
Documents cited in the Missouri Attorney General's lawsuit disclosed.
And a 2021 report by the Election Integrity Partnership at Stanford found that of nearly 4,800 flagged items, technology platforms took action on 35%, either removing, labeling, or soft-blocking speech, meaning the users were only able to view content after bypassing a warning screen.
The research was done in consultation with CISA, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, of course.
I was involved, I believe, in that report, and it stains my Wikipedia to this day.
But as you know, my friends, I only use NewsGuard-certified sources, so certainly there must be something wrong with their report if NewsGuard isn't credible enough for me to repeat information from.
Absolutely incredible.
How about that?
Prior to the 2020 election, tech companies including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, Wikipedia, Microsoft, LinkedIn, and Verizon Media met on a monthly basis with the FBI, CISA, and other government representatives.
According to NBC News, the meetings were part of an initiative still ongoing between the private sector and government to discuss how firms would handle misinformation during the election.
The stepped-up counter-disinformation effort began in 2018 following high-profile hacking incidents of U.S.
firms.
When Congress passed and President Donald Trump signed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act, forming a new wing of DHS devoted to protecting critical infrastructure.
An August 2022 report by the DHS Office of Inspector General sketches the rapidly accelerating move towards policing disinformation.
So Donald Trump certainly had his hand in this.
from the outset.
CISA boasted of an evolved mission to monitor social media discussions while routing disinformation concerns to private sector platforms.
That is a direct violation of 1A.
In 2018, then DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen created the Countering Foreign Influence Task Force to respond to election disinformation.
The task force, which included members of CISA as well as its Office of Intelligence and Analysis, generated threat intelligence about the election and notified social media platforms and law enforcement.
At the same time, DHS began notifying social media companies about voting-related disinformation appearing on social media platforms.
In 2019, DHS created a separate entity called the Foreign Influence and Interference Branch to generate more detailed intelligence about disinformation.
The Inspector General Report shows that year, its staff grew to include 15 full and part-time staff dedicated to disinformation analysis.
In 2020, the disinformation focus expanded to include COVID-19, according to a Homeland Threat Assessment, issued by Acting Secretary Chad Wolf.
This apparatus had a dry run during the 2020 election, when CISA began working with members of the U.S.
intelligence community.
Office of Intelligence and Analysis personnel attended weekly teleconferences to coordinate intelligence community activities to counter election-related disinformation.
According to the IG report, meetings have continued to take place every two weeks since the elections.
Full stop!
The U.S.
government is involved in colluding with big tech, subverting our elections.
And they're doing it under the guise of protecting us from foreign influence.
Might I remind you, Donald Trump did not collude with Russia, and the narrative was largely bunk, while many foreign countries are trying to interfere.
What we've seen from this is not the takedown of fake news from foreign governments, but the censorship of people who oppose the U.S.
government, the establishment, or more importantly, the Democratic Party.
With Joe Biden coming out and saying MAGA Republicans are an extremist threat, What do you think this is really targeting?
Do you think the Biden administration is saying they're going to take down information they're taking down information they agree with?
Or do you think they're taking down information from news organizations that challenge the status quo and have done so?
Under President Joe Biden, the shifting focus on disinformation has continued.
In January 2021, CISA replaced the Countering Foreign Influence Task Force with the Misinformation, Disinformation, and Malinformation Team, which was created to promote more flexibility to focus on General MDM.
By now, the scope of the effort has expanded beyond disinformation produced by foreign governments to include domestic versions.
The MDM team, according to one CISA official quoted in the IG report, counters all types of disinformation to be responsive to current events.
Jen Easterly, Biden's appointed director of CISA, swiftly made it clear that she would continue to shift resources in the agency to combat the spread of dangerous forms of information on social media.
One could argue we are in the business of critical infrastructure, and the most critical infrastructure is our cognitive infrastructure.
So building that resilience to misinformation and disinformation I think is incredibly important, said Easterly, speaking at a conference in November 2021.
Let's pause for a moment and give you some context.
Hands up, don't shoot.
Fakes.
It was fake.
News media edited the audio from George Zimmerman to make it sound like he was racist.
Hillary Clinton, right now, is spreading conspiracies about 2024.
The corporate press is spreading conspiracies about 2020.
It's clear, isn't it?
It's not about stopping the spread of MDM.
It's about controlling information that hurts the establishment machine, the government.
I mean, they made it clear.
They want to suppress information that makes them look bad.
Yo, this is absolutely insane.
Again, I'm going to take Super Chats in a little bit, but look how long this story is.
We got a bit to go through because I can't leave this story hanging.
There's too much here.
They say CISA's domain has gradually expanded to encompass more subjects it believes amount to critical infrastructure.
Last year, The Intercept reported on the existence of a series of DHS field intelligence reports warning of attack on cell towers, which it has tied to conspiracy theorists who believe 5G towers spread COVID-19.
I think that's insane, mind you.
One intelligence report pointed out that these conspiracy theories are inciting attacks against the communications infrastructure.
That right there.
I get it.
I do.
I hear you.
People believe crazy things.
Look, right now, a lot of people believe crazy stuff about this Pelosi story.
And I certainly think they're not telling us the truth, but I think you can be reasonable and break down some of this.
One of the elements of that story, which again, I'm not going to get too much into, but just give you one point.
Why were they both in their underwear?
Why did Paul Pelosi say this guy was his friend?
Well, I can- I- Off the top of my head, it's 2 in the morning.
I mean, I sleep in my underwear.
Boom, there's a big revelation.
Most people do.
So if someone broke into my house at 2 in the a.m., I would be armed and in my underwear.
I'd try to throw on pants, I guess.
But if someone broke into my house, And then, so people say, why is the glass outside?
I don't know, he hits the glass, breaks it open, and then pulls glass out to clear it or something?
It's a possibility.
Maybe not.
Maybe the story doesn't add up.
Why did he call the police and say he was friends?
Maybe because there's a strange man in his home and he's worried he's going to get attacked.
So he gets on the phone and says, yeah, yeah, yeah, there's a guy, don't worry, he's a friend, but I need help because he doesn't want to agitate him.
Then again, he apparently was in the bathroom at the time, so who knows?
I just think it's fair to say we're not getting the full story on that one.
Some people are going really far with it, but I think it's fair to say they're not telling us the truth.
Anyway.
Let's read some more.
And for those that are wondering, I wear Tommy John's boxer briefs because people are posting in the chat, like, Tidy Wipes.
Well, we were sponsored by Tommy John's on the podcast, so, like, I have a bunch of them.
They're pretty good, actually.
Not a sponsor spot, but hey.
Here we go.
What a shout-out.
I love that word, pre-bunk.
And de-bunk.
Let me explain something for you, okay?
Pre-bunk would mean to, like, preliminarily confirm the story.
De-bunk, right?
that she is trying to get us in place where Fed can work with platforms to better understand
misinformation trends so relevant agencies can try to pre-bunk.
I love that word, pre-bunk and debunk.
Let me explain something for you.
Pre-bunk would mean to like preliminarily confirm the story.
De-bunk, right?
D is a prefix, so bunk would be to prove correct, I guess.
I like to say re-bunk.
Re-bunking is after they claim it's debunked.
I come out and prove they were actually lying the whole time.
Anyway.
Here we go.
To accomplish these broad goals, the report said CISA should invest in external research to evaluate the efficacy of interventions, specifically with research looking at how alleged disinformation can be countered and how quickly messages spread.
Jeff Hale, the director of the Election Security Initiative at CISA, recommended the use of third-party information-sharing nonprofits as a clearinghouse for trust information to avoid the appearance of government propaganda.
Ha ha ha.
Last Thursday, immediately following billionaire Elon Musk's completed acquisition of Twitter, Vijaya Gadde was terminated from the company.
The Biden administration, however, did take a stab at making part of the infrastructure public in April 2022 with the announcements of the Disinformation Governance Board.
The exact functions of the board and how it would accomplish its goal were never made clear.
The board faced immediate backlash.
You see, this is what they're trying to do with the Disinformation Governance Board.
Slow roll it.
Give you a little bit of what's going on, so it's normalized, and then eventually you accept the whole thing.
15 days to slow the spread turned into two years.
A year and a half.
Didn't work.
People went nuts saying, dude, this is a violation of 1A outright.
DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas alluded to broad scope of the agency's disinformation effort when he told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that the role of the board, which by that point had been downgraded to a working group, is to actually develop guidelines, standards, guardrails, to ensure that the work that has been ongoing for nearly 10 years does not infringe on people's free speech rights, rights of privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties.
They'd already done that, by the way.
It was quite disconcerting, frankly.
The disinformation work that was well underway for many years across different independent administrations was not guided by guardrails.
DHS eventually scrapped the Disinformation Governance Board in August, while free speech advocates cheered the dissolution of the board.
Other government efforts to root out disinformation have not only continued, but expanded to encompass additional DHS sub-agencies, like CBP.
Which determines whether information about the components spread through social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter is accurate.
Other agencies, such as Immigrations and Custom Enforcement, the Science and Technology Directorate, and the Secret Service have also expanded their purview to include disinformation, according to the Inspector General Report.
You see the game they're playing?
They're outright saying they're manipulating and controlling the flow of information.
And they're doing so outright under the guise of defending our election.
Excuse me.
The draft copy of DHS's 2022 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, reviewed by The Intercept, also confirms that DHS views the issues of tackling disinformation and misinformation as a growing portion of its core duties.
They were expanding this.
So how do we make this stop?
The broad definition of threat actors posing risk to vaguely defined critical infrastructure, an area as broad as trust in government, public health, elections, and financial markets, has concerned civil libertarians.
Quote, no matter your political allegiances, all of us have good reason to be concerned about government efforts to pressure private social media platforms into reaching the government's preferred decisions about what content we can see online, said Adam Goldstein, vice president of research at FIRE.
Any governmental requests to social media platforms to review or remove certain content should be made with extreme transparency.
Oh, man.
Allergies, excuse me.
DHS expansion into misinformation to MDM represents an important strategic retooling for the agency, which was founded in 2002 in response to 9-11.
They say in addition to traditional forms of terror posed by groups like Al-Qaeda, it has evolved with the rise of social media with groups like ISIS.
FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee that law enforcement agencies need to rapidly adapt and confront the challenges posed by terror networks.
They're getting into reasoning.
I'm not super concerned about their reasoning and a lot of that.
I understand that.
The important thing is the revelation, so we'll move down now.
I think we've gotten to the crux of what was going on.
Here's where it all begins.
In May, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmidt took the lead in filing a lawsuit to combat what he views as sweeping efforts by the Biden administration to pressure social media companies to moderate certain forms of content appearing on their platforms.
Proven correct now.
The suit alleges government-wide efforts to censor certain stories, especially ones related to the pandemic.
It also names multiple agencies across the government that have participated in efforts to monitor speech and open collusion.
Well, there you go.
That's what we get.
media companies. It identifies, for example, emails between officials from the National
Institutes of Health, including Fauci, and Zuckerberg at the beginning of the pandemic,
and reveals ongoing discussions between senior Biden administration officials with meta executives
on developing content moderation policies on a range of issues, including issues related to
elections and vaccines. Well, there you go. That's what we get, man. I don't know what else to say
other than welcome to the dystopian nightmare. It's here before us.
But if you haven't already, would you kindly smash the like button, subscribe to this channel, and get your superchats in, because I'll, uh... There you go.
I'm going to read some of your superchats right now.
We're going to have more coming up tonight at 8 p.m.
over at YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL.
We're going to have a guest and a big conversation about this, and I'm going to—it's there, right?
It's right there.
I understand we knew about this because of revelations from Alex Berenson and from other stories that have been leaking out for some time.
A major story from the Joe Rogan podcast with Mark Zuckerberg, where Zuckerberg said, the FBI came to us and said, watch out for disinformation, and then they censored the story.
on Hunter Biden's laptop.
Now we know there was a portal for them built, and they say the login's still live.
I wonder if it's been taken down yet.
Let's read some super chats from you guys, and then, uh, happy Halloween, I guess.
All right, all right.
Subject to change says, oh boy, big news, you bet.
All right.
Matthew Hammond, referencing COVID amnesty, said if they want COVID amnesty, then fire all appointed officials at the state and federal admin level and vote out elected officials at the state level that issued mandates.
Now, I'd say Cuomo, Wolf, Whitmer, Newsom.
Who else?
Who is it?
Was it Phil Murphy?
Am I getting his name wrong?
Anyway, any one of these governors that put COVID patients in nursing homes?
Murder charges, hands down.
All right, let's see.
Jeff the Handyman says, Crowder got kicked off YouTube a week before the election.
30-day ban.
Wonder if there's a memo about it.
Yep.
How much you want to bet?
Crowder is still doing his live show on Rumble, by the way.
I'm glad Rumble's still around.
R. Bracewell says, we have trials for treason.
This would be, I believe, sedition, not treason.
All right, all right.
Let's see.
I'll just try to read as many as we can that I think are big.
All right.
Kyle Miller says, the Tim Pool 4pm segment should be live every day of the week.
That way you get more income for the Timcast Empire to interact with us.
It is a good idea.
It is a lot easier to do the show live outright.
That's true.
But it's easier to do, but I give myself until like 3 p.m.
to prepare for the 4 p.m.
segment, so it's not always easy to set a schedule time.
And sometimes I'm able to get done early if that's the case, so... But let's read some more.
Alright, let's see.
A lot of people saying thank you, I really do appreciate it.
Dionra Walton says, direct violation of the First Amendment.
Jack Ryan says, conspiracy could mean making this into a RICO case.
Political power is a profit motive every bit as much as money.
Worth asking some legal experts.
Here, here.
I'll be asking as we get ready for the later segment.
I'll keep this rolling just for a few more minutes because I've got a lot of stuff going on that we have to deal with, especially with the story breaking research.
Let's see if we can just read a couple more here.
Alright, alright.
Mr. Pham says, I always thought this was true, but it hits different with clear evidence.
Agreed.
Man, my heart's been racing this whole time, I gotta tell you.
You probably noticed that I was talking really, really fast, because I'm like, I gotta get through this.
This is crazy.
That's why I'm doing a live show.
Griefers Crew says, I love how many things keep coming out now.
People woke up during the pandemic.
That's right, that's right.
Mind of a Madman says, here's some change for the Alex Jones is right jar.
All hail the beanie.
Thank you, I really do appreciate it, definitely.
Yeah.
I've been thinking about that Alex Jones is right, Jar, that's for sure.
I'd like to see any documents Twitter has on Alex Jones.
Elon, you got him.
Let's see him.
Alright.
Odin says, the fact that people are okay with government-controlled misinformation department is wild.
The same people on the left that preach how evil the US government is are the first people to trick the boot?
Lick the boot?
Ryan says, why is this not being reported everywhere?
Well, with you guys watching this, tweet at people and tell them this is the story.
This should be every major outlet.
Obviously the big, major corporate ones aren't going to do it because they're probably colluding with government as well.
Alright, let's see.
Beastly Devil says, Tim, you should see the segment that Trevor Noah did on Carrie Lake.
The man is trying hard to disparage her character and his minion Klepper with his GOP rally content.
A new episode of his today.
Eh, I'll take a look, I suppose.
I don't like watching him because he's terrible, but I do watch a bit of the left stuff.
Belisarius says, is there any way for you to do an interview with Snowden about these leaks?
Don't know.
Maybe.
I have no idea.
Alright.
There it is.
It's laid out for you guys.
The next segment's coming up at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcast IRL.
Perhaps in the future I'll try and do more of these live.
Tremendous success on Friday's live stream.
It got half a million views.
I was surprised by that.
So... But it's big news.
You know, there's not always big news.
Sometimes the live segment is just like, let's take a look at the polling data, you know?
This story had me, like, screaming.
I gotta tell ya.
It's here.
They got the text.
They got the documents.
Vijay Ghat is crying.
Right in front of ya.
You can follow me on Twitter at TimCast.
Smash the like button on your way out.
Become a member at TimCast.com.
Go to YouTube.com slash TimCast IRL and subscribe.
We're gonna be live there tonight.
It's gonna be big.
Thank you so much for watching.
Stay tuned, and we will see you all then.
The meltdown over at Twitter is getting absolutely hilarious with a whole bunch of new reports coming out over the weekend.
First, we have Twitter plans to lay off 25% of workforce in round one of job cuts.
Round one.
Amazing.
I'm hearing some people say that it's like 10 to 1 managers to coders.
We've also got news that Twitter may start charging $20 per month in order for you to be verified.
Now, what that really means is the highest tier of Twitter Blue, their subscription service, will grant along with it verification.
And the left is collectively losing its mind.
Why?
Well, many of these younger leftists who aren't verified don't care.
But many of these woke Twitterati journalists are like, you're gonna take away my badge from me!
Now, I think Elon may be making a mistake here.
We'll see.
There's a lot of net positives to charging money for verification.
And the main issue is, some people only want to interact with real people.
You don't want to waste time with bots.
That was Elon's big thing, right?
If you, as a regular person, sign up for an account, pay 20 bucks a month, you get your credit card information in there, then maybe we're going to see way more verified profiles, and they're probably going to have a rule for verification, like you have to use a real picture, and you have to use your real name, and you can be verified.
If you want to be anonymous, you're not going to get a verification.
I don't see any other reason they would... I don't see any other way they could really implement this.
But the thing is, many of these woke Twitterati journalists, it's their whole world that they're verified on Twitter.
I'm not a normal plebe like you.
I'm actually verified.
I have 500 followers, but my company got me verified.
Wink.
Taking it all away from them.
There are many journalists who have like 10k followers and they're verified because their companies verified them.
Called up Twitter and said, please verify my journalist.
And so Twitter very much was trying to make this badge a symbol of being cool and being in to make sure influencers wanted to be on the platform.
It's a mistake.
How about this?
Elon Musk, you pay high-tier content creators to produce on the platform.
Like every other platform.
Let's read the first story.
We do have big news, too.
It's a bit more esoteric, so I didn't want to lead with it, but Elon Musk posted evidence that Well, Elon Musk was claiming that the Twitter board was hiding evidence from him about bots, and now that he owns the company and he has access to leaked messages, he's publishing them.
And he says this is evidence hidden from the court.
A lot of people are pointing out Elon Musk now has access to all of these communications, censorship emails, internal dialogues, and that means some people might go to jail.
It's a long shot, I gotta be honest.
But I'm willing to bet some of these top executives at Twitter were lying out their asses.
And so, Elon, look man, I got a request.
Uh, what did Vijaya Gade say about everything they did and Jack Dorsey back in 2019?
You have those internal communications.
You can show if they were lying on the Joe Rogan podcast about everything.
You can show if these people were lying in court.
But let's read first with what's making the woke Twitterati cry the most.
From NDTV, Twitter takeover.
Twitter had over 7,000 employees at the end of 2021, according to a regulatory filing, and a quarter of the headcount amounts to nearly 2,000 employees.
They say celebrity lawyer Alex Spiro, longtime Musk legal rep, Let the conversation about job cuts.
Twitter had over 7,000 employees at the end of 2021, so that means they're going to be nuking about 2,000 employees.
Alright, alright.
You get it.
You get it.
Let's do this.
Let's talk about Elon Musk and this evidence here, and then I'm going to talk to you about the verification thing.
And I think Elon may be making a mistake, but we will see.
It's all about winning the culture war, and I'll explain.
But this is big, too.
This one gets into the legal grounds.
Elon Musk accused Twitter's former board of directors and their lawyers of deliberately hiding evidence from court proceedings days after the entrepreneur's $44 billion deal was finalized, saying, Wachtell and Twitter board deliberately hid this evidence from the court, Musk tweeted Sunday night.
He included a screenshot of internal messages from a Twitter executive referencing fraudulent metrics.
Stay tuned, more to come, the billionaire added.
Take a look at this.
This is the image he posted, and it's from Yoel Roth, a far-left lunatic, in my opinion, but Elon seems to like him, sure.
He wrote, in an internal message, But also, lol, if Amir continues to BS me, my escalation route is, quote, Amir's OKRs are entirely based on fraudulent metrics, and he doesn't care and may actively be trying to hide the ball.
Literally doing what Elon is accusing us of doing.
So this is 160432.
The next message, 160449.
It would appear.
Those messages were about back-to-back.
And he says, literally doing what Elon is accusing us of doing.
Whoa there!
Why wasn't this internal communication released?
I mean, certainly it should have been in the court proceedings.
It should have been a discovery or something.
They claimed they turned over all of the data.
Did they turn over one of their top individuals saying that someone's using fraudulent metrics to maybe trying to hide the ball?
That one's important.
Maybe their argument is going to be, he wasn't doing that and y'all was leveling an accusation.
Well, this is kind of funny.
Elon tries suing to not buy Twitter, and I think for good reason.
They were lying about their bot numbers, and they're trying to rip him off.
Elon Musk probably had a conversation, and I'm wondering what's going on.
Here's a thought.
And they said, look, Elon, his advisors, if you really think they're doing this, when you buy the company, you will get access to all of this.
And if you can prove they misled you in the court, that could be fraud.
In which case, Elon Musk may have said, you know what?
I'll buy the platform from you.
Got the people on board, now he has access to all the evidence, and he may be able to go after all of them.
There was more news that came out on Friday about this.
Apparently, they wrote that Elon fired the top executives for cause, so they don't get their golden parachutes.
I don't know if that's true.
Someone said something about, you know, someone wrote a story, Elon said it was false, so we'll see.
But, suffice it to say, Things are getting really spicy.
But let's talk about the health of this platform.
Ah, yes.
Twitter is planning to start charging $20 per month for verification.
And if the employees building it don't meet their deadline, they'll be fired by Elon Musk.
Oh, you love to see it!
Fire them all, Elon.
Here we go.
Let's talk about this change.
Are you excited to get your verification badge?
Elon Musk ran a poll.
I think it was Elon.
Someone at Twitter ran a poll.
Would you be willing to pay for a verification?
And like 80% said no.
Yeah, but that's kind of the point, right?
Verification is for the top-tier individuals, but here's the story.
The directive is to change Twitter Blue, the company's optional $4.99 a month subscription that unlocks additional features, into a more expensive subscription that also verifies users, according to people familiar with the matter, and internal correspondents seen by The Verge.
Twitter is currently planning to charge $19.99 for the new Twitter Blue subscription.
Under the current plan, verified users would have 90 days to subscribe or lose their Blue checkmark.
Employees working on the project were told on Sunday that they need to meet a deadline of November 7th to launch the feature or they will be fired.
I will absolutely pay $20.
Not for verification, but for an expanded suite of tools.
In fact, I'd pay a lot more.
Somebody did this.
It might have been Elon.
Somebody tweeted a while ago, would you pay, you know, 100, 300 bucks a month for an expanded suite of tools for Twitter?
And, yeah, I would.
Make, look, I've got 1.36 million followers on Twitter.
Thank you all for following me.
I mean, I don't really take it all that seriously.
But there's a lot of people who follow me when I post a lot of silly nonsense or, you know, make points people seem to agree with.
If you give me better data analytics, better tools for interactivity, maybe if you integrate it with Rumble, I would pay for a premium package as a business platform for my company.
For TimCast News, follow at TimCast News if you haven't already.
If you were to give my business some kind of expanded news delivery option and tools and things like that, we'd pay more than $20.
If verification comes along with it.
Now if you're just like, all you get is verified?
I don't know, maybe?
I don't really care all that much.
It's like, do you care that much about the blue checkmark?
Or do you just have the followers?
I guess.
And the interaction.
Meritocracy.
Now, of course, many of these woke Twitterati are losing their minds over this, and they're trying to play it off cool.
And this is where I think.
There's some good and there's bad here.
The good.
Regular people should be allowed to get verified.
Verification was always supposed to be a service so that you could say, I am who I am.
Let's say you legitimately want to run your business and you want people to know that you, John Smith, are actually John Smith.
But meanwhile, there's a cartoon avatar version of John Smith.
And you're like, that's not me.
And people say, well, I don't know.
What if you're James O'Keefe and you've got impersonators?
Okay, well, I want to be verified.
One of the reasons they never did widespread verification was that it was impossible to verify everybody.
As a free service, going through everyone's IDs and checking is very, very difficult.
If someone's spending money, their credit card information is on file, it's pretty easy to verify them.
And now you'll have, let's say rather simply, James O'Keefe, Project Veritas, likely to be unbanned, I'm assuming, once Elon starts unbanning people.
And he says, look, I got people who are pretending to be me.
I need the verification badge so people know this is the official account of my company and the videos we post.
Very valuable.
Very valuable.
They'll do it.
Now, it's possible, you know, for someone like James, you might be like, I got millions of followers.
I mean, assuming he gets reinstated.
I don't need it that much.
No, I think it's worth it when you have impersonators because people will make fake accounts and then try and post things impersonating you and this just makes it easier.
Makes it a lot easier.
Now these woke Twitterati are saying, the value of being verified is so that you know who's legit and who's not.
And it's like, uh-huh, if you're paying 20 bucks on a credit card, I really doubt Elon's gonna let you be a communist squirrel.
No, you're verified when you have your face and name or brand attached to it.
So you could do brands, I'm sure.
They're going to say, Musk has been clear, or hold on, they say this, employees working on the project were told on Sunday that they need to meet a deadline of November 7th to launch the feature or they'll be fired.
Musk has been clear in the months leading up to his acquisition that he wanted to revamp how Twitter verifies accounts and handles bots.
On Sunday, he tweeted, the whole verification process is being revamped right now.
I'm glad to hear it.
I really, really am.
I would likely buy this service, but let me tell you about the pitfalls.
Elon, I gotta tell you something, buddy.
I'm a big fan, but you're not cool.
I'm sorry.
That's just reality.
Yeah, you're cool in a certain respect.
I mean, obviously the richest guy on the planet going to space and all that.
A lot of people do look up to you.
But you need to win the culture war first.
I'll explain.
Right now, there is an active campaign.
It's emergent.
I don't think it's conspiratorial.
Emergent among many of these woke Twitterati and Twitter leftists saying things like, I don't even want the verification badge.
The verification badge is so dumb.
Why would anybody want to be verified?
And what they're trying to do is Google Glass you.
Alright, here's what happened.
Google Glass.
You remember this, guys?
You had, it was the headset, and it had the little screen above your right eye, and you could look up, and you'd see a screen.
It was really cool.
Really cool.
I have it somewhere in a box.
I don't know, it probably doesn't work anymore.
I've had multiple of them.
So, to make the screen work, they had to have a reflective Mylar, but it would, like, disintegrate, and so whatever.
So, they replaced them for me quite a bit, actually, because I went around doing crazy stuff with them.
I was in, like, Turkey and stuff like that.
Testing it out, trying to get it to work, you couldn't really... It was cool to take pictures with and stuff like that, but anyway, everyone wanted it.
There was this big Twitter trend where it was, like, Google Explorer or whatever, and I was like, I want to be a Google Explorer!
It was like 1,500 bucks to buy the thing.
And so, people would go on Twitter begging for them.
And Google said, ask and ye shall receive.
And then gave them all out.
But uh-oh.
The woke Twitterati, the writers at a bunch of news organizations, didn't get in.
And so, you know what they did?
You're a glasshole!
You're so dumb!
And they started this campaign all across these tech blogs where they were like, everybody thinks Google Glass is lame.
It's so lame, I don't even want it.
And it worked.
All of a sudden, all of these woke New York bros said, Google Glass is stupid, and I didn't want it anyway.
Sour grapes was very, very easy for everybody.
So now that nobody could have Glass, and the journalists didn't get it, all of a sudden, you were being made fun of for having it.
All of a sudden, people didn't want to wear them anymore, and they became very uncool, despite the fact that everybody wanted them.
I said this.
If Google had just said, we've released this to the explorers, and now because of how popular it is, we are going public to release Google Glass, it would have been the coolest thing.
Everyone would have wanted it.
Everyone would have been using them.
That's just it.
But Google doesn't understand.
The same thing happened with Google+.
They were like, come on, everybody.
And then by the time only the cool people were invited to be in Google+, same thing happened.
Sour Grapes, I don't want to be on your dumb platform anyway.
It's so stupid.
And then by the time they made Google+, public, it was lame and nobody wanted to be on it because everyone was making fun of it.
Here's what might happen.
Right now, you've got people saying things like, I don't even want to be verified.
It's so dumb.
Take a look at this guy, John Schwartz.
John Schwartz, you're full of it.
UT Austin journalism professor.
Oh yeah, John?
He says, I wouldn't pay 20 bucks a month to be on Twitter, much less to hold on to my check mark.
As far as I can tell, the only thing it does is lets people who hate my posts call me a blue check a-hole.
Without it, they'll just call me an a-hole.
I can live with the demotion.
Okay, John.
Go into your account right now and remove the verification.
Because you can.
You can.
At any time, if you're verified, remove your little blue checkmark.
You gonna do it?
You gonna remove it, John?
I didn't think so.
Because you could've removed it before you made this post.
You could've made a post saying, to show you how much I don't care about this, I've removed the verification post.
Here's one verified guy Nick says, I would argue against that, in that the only thing it does
is prevent other people from impersonating you, which can be annoying and even dangerous, I suppose.
There is a purpose to verification, though it has rarely been in practice here and everything else, yes.
Okay.
Well, come on.
Remove it.
Remove your little badge.
I did not think so.
Will Chamberlain says, to David Levitt.
Levitt said, retweet if you're unwilling to pay $20 a month to use Twitter.
And Will says, lol, you want people to pay $4.99 a month just to see your paywalled tweets.
That's right.
The dude has a super follow account.
He wants you to spend money to see what he has to say.
I also have SuperFollow set up.
I posted some stuff on it, so there's some stuff you can look at.
But I don't know, man.
Look, Twitter is a garbage platform.
It's just, I don't know if Elon really can save this thing from being just complete and utter garbage.
The reality is, Twitter technology is trash.
And you know, I talked to Ian about this quite a bit, if you watch TimCast IRL, and he says, you gotta free the code, man.
Free the code.
And I'm like, In terms of the algorithm and how we're all being manipulated and how they're lying, agreed.
Elon should do that too.
Make the algorithm open source and available to the public.
As for like their proprietary software, I don't know.
It doesn't matter.
Twitter doesn't offer you anything.
It's a micro-blog.
There's so many.
The technology is garbage.
The technology has been around forever.
They didn't invent anything.
What they found was a community.
What Twitter was capitalizing on is the woke Twitterati.
They want trendsetters and influencers to be using the platform to tell people what is cool and what isn't.
That's really what it is.
And that's why the verification badge has always been an endorsement.
So therein lies the big problem.
This is one of the reasons Twitter always bent the knee to the woke Twitterati.
They make up like 25% of the active user base.
They are what make people want to be on Twitter, this interaction.
Now for me, I don't really care all that much.
You know what I use Twitter for?
It's like a news aggregator in RSS.
I have got like a bunch of journalists, activists, and personalities in politics that I follow to see what they're thinking.
That's really what it's for, I guess.
As for a lot of these activist types and these woke journalists, it's their only value.
The only thing they have going for them.
I mean, think about this.
You live in New York.
You're, you know, 30 years old.
You got no family.
You're not in a relationship.
You write articles about Brad Pitt's junk.
What value have you?
You're verified on Twitter.
Excuse me, I'm a Twitter verified user.
There's a viral tweet where some guy's like, I've got 30,000 followers.
You do not want to piss me off.
Okay, dude.
It's just so pathetic.
And I've always hated, I've always despised.
It's why I really love the idea of taking it away from them.
Take away their badges.
Look, I got verified back in 2013 when Vice called Twitter and said, verify Tim Pool.
And I was like, oh look at that, I'm verified.
Nah, I'm famous.
I get to be with the in crowd.
Whatever, man.
You know, what always matters is just getting more followers.
You want to seem important?
Have followers.
There you go.
People listen.
They care about what you have to say.
And even then, it's not even that big of a deal.
It's not even that important.
One thing I've always hated.
Follower counts, it's like, to many people, a point system of societal value.
And I just think it's really stupid.
Have confidence in yourself.
You don't need followers.
But the reality is, when it comes to getting screwed with by businesses, it is a powerful weapon.
That's a reality.
I had trouble with the bank.
They were trying to screw me over.
Made a mistake.
I tweeted one time.
Uh-oh.
I got a million followers.
They called me up in two seconds.
You see, that's the reality of this power of Twitter.
And it's kind of creepy.
But this is why the system is so broken.
Because it's true and there's nothing you can do about it.
Twitter once talked about hiding follower counts.
I dig it.
Hide the follower count.
Seriously.
Who cares?
You can subscribe to someone's page, their follower count, they can tweet out, hey guys, look how many followers I have now.
Take away the follower count, Elon Musk.
I don't care that I have a million followers on Twitter.
I don't.
Okay?
These people are so vapid.
Just take it away.
They talked about it 10 years ago, and they said it not to.
Why?
They realized it was what made Twitter work.
You want to save humanity, Elon?
Take away the follower count.
Take away so much of the metrics.
People want their tweets to be seen.
They want people to see the ratio.
Just hide all those metrics.
Take those numbers away.
You can click the tweet, you can see who responded.
You can retweet it, but you don't need to see how many retweets it has.
I never understood that.
This post has 5,000 retweets.
So what?
Did you see the words of it or not?
Take away these numbers.
You want to save humanity?
That's how you do it.
Unfortunately, people will go to other platforms where they can see the numbers and they can brag about how many shares they got and how many views they got and all that stuff.
That's the other thing too.
View count on YouTube.
I don't care.
People watch my videos because they like them.
Does it matter that it's 200,000, 300,000?
My video from Friday.
I gotta start doing Friday live streams.
I got half a million views on that.
You know?
I can see that.
I know it works.
Does it matter if other people see how many views are on these videos?
I suppose you can hide the number, I guess.
Whatever.
There's something to the idea that a video has a lot of views.
It makes more people want to watch it.
So I can understand that.
It's like, oh, this one's got a lot of views.
It must be worth something.
And this one doesn't, and people might not want to watch it.
But I believe that character building, meritocracy, would be better served if we got rid of all of these numbers.
Now, maybe the view count's probably fine, I guess.
My view is, I don't know enough about how videos are served to people based on that, so I wouldn't want to screw around with it.
But as for Twitter, I think them getting rid of the retweet number, the like number, and all that stuff, probably a good thing.
Taking away verification as this elite status symbol, probably a very good thing.
But in the meantime, we'll just sit back and wait.
I'm hoping Elon Musk dumps more internal communications and we see the censorship emails.
That'll be huge.
But we do have more stories to talk about, my friends.
This Paul Pelosi story is going viral and now involves Elon Musk, and the media is losing their minds.
So we'll talk about the next segment over on this channel, actually, at 1 p.m.
So thanks for hanging out.
Stay tuned, 1 p.m.
on this channel, and we'll see you all then.
I reckon those that locked us down and the politicians that murdered tens of thousands of people are right worried about this coming midterm election.
Because since 2018, Democrats have been in control in Congress.
Now, of course, Donald Trump was the president until 2020, until 2021, basically.
And the Democrats have had control of Congress, so we have not gotten a good inquiry into what happened over the COVID lockdowns, the vaccines, etc.
Were they rolled out properly?
Were the people adequately informed?
What happened?
Well, of course, now we have an article from The Atlantic.
Let's declare a pandemic amnesty.
We need to forgive one another for what we did and said when we were in the dark about COVID.
We need to forgive.
That's right.
When those governors, Cuomo, Wolf, Whitmer, Newsom, when they put sick or recovering COVID patients who are still infectious into nursing homes, killing the elderly, We need to forgive them!
That's what they're saying, right?
When they told you you weren't allowed to see the birth of your child.
When they said you could not be there.
When your grandparent, parent, or loved one was dying.
They want your forgiveness.
The funny thing is, the skeptics, they're not the ones who called for draconian measures.
They're not the ones who shut down Walmart when people were trying to buy seeds.
They're not the ones who in New Jersey went to the business of a woman who was live streaming and told her to stop.
Yeah, I'm not entirely convinced it was about COVID, but here we are.
Here's a story from the Atlantic.
Seems to me that the people who orchestrated much of the lockdowns know that there's going to be some accountability, and they're hoping you forgive them.
What do I have to forgive anyone for?
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
What do I have to apologize for?
I'm not going to be forgiving any of these psychotic draconian lunatics, but why would I apologize for anything?
Why would someone need to forgive me?
What did I do?
Did I put children in masks?
Did I lock them in their rooms?
Did I forcefully inject anybody?
Did I create COVID camps in Australia where people were detained and then some even tried to escape?
Did I pull up to someone's house with a police vehicle?
I didn't do any of that.
In fact, I mostly minded my own business.
So when you say, let's declare a pandemic amnesty, you're basically saying that I should not hold you accountable for all the damage you wrought.
Here's the article from The Atlantic.
This is from Emily Oster.
We need to forgive one another for what we've said.
She says, let's read through this.
And then we have some news.
In April 2020, with nothing else to do, my family took an enormous number of hikes.
We all wore cloth masks that I had made myself.
We had a family hand signal, which the person in front would use if someone was approaching
on the trail and we needed to put on our masks.
Oh.
Once, when another child got too close to my then four-year-old son on a bridge, he
yelled at her, social distancing, because you're psychotic.
In April 2020, no one got the coronavirus from passing someone else hiking.
Outdoor transmission was vanishingly rare.
Our cloth masks made out of old bandanas wouldn't have done anything anyway, but the thing is, we didn't know.
So what?
Ignorance is no excuse for the lockdowns and the death.
And might I add, From the Wall Street Journal, September 2020.
The failed experiment of COVID lockdowns.
We have known for a very long time that the lockdowns weren't working.
Why is it then that they were maintained until the summer of 2021?
Why is it that there were mask mandates in West Virginia until then?
You dare now say amnesty?
No.
You in government, you leftist cult members, don't get to overreact, cause mass suffering and death, and then go, well, you know, I had good intentions, so forgive me?
No.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
Not how it works.
She writes, I've been reflecting on this lack of knowledge thanks to a class I'm co-teaching at Brown University on COVID.
Oh, co-teaching, oh, Brown.
We've spent several lectures reliving the first year of the pandemic discussing the many important choices we had to make under conditions of tremendous uncertainty.
Some of these choices turned out to be better than others.
To take an example close to my own work, there is an emerging, if not universal, consensus that schools in the U.S.
Whereas the cost to students' well-being and educational progress were high.
The latest figures on learning loss are alarming.
But in spring and summer 2020, we had only glimmers of information.
Reasonable people, people who cared about children and teachers, advocated on both sides
of the reopening debate.
No.
No, you can't play that card.
You see, if I'm concerned about catching COVID, I do one thing.
I don't go out.
I don't demand the government force you to stay home.
You see the difference here?
If you're concerned about your children getting COVID, you say, children, you're not going to school.
You don't say, shut down the school for everyone.
See how that works?
Another example.
When the vaccines came out, we lacked definitive data on the relative efficacies of the Johnson & Johnson shot versus the mRNA options from Pfizer and Moderna.
The mRNA vaccines have won out.
But at the time, many people in public health were either neutral or expressed a J&J preference.
The misstep wasn't nefarious.
It was the result of uncertainty.
What point are you making here?
Okay, first, as I always say, get medical advice from doctors, not podcasters.
And I think the smartest thing you can do is talk to your doctor about your medical history, ask them questions, and make sure they are up to date on all of the relevant information.
And if they're not, find a better doctor.
Now I'd like to show you this.
You've seen it.
Yahoo News reports, New York Supreme Court orders New York City to rehire and pay back wages to unvaccinated employees.
In a shocking statement!
Quote, the health commissioner cannot create a new condition of employment for city employees, cannot prohibit an employee from reporting to work, and cannot terminate employees.
The mayor cannot exempt certain employees from these orders.
Reads the opinion.
Okay.
It was authored by Judge Ralph J. Porzio.
Porzio noted that vaccination against COVID-19 does not prevent transmission of the disease, but noted that the decision is not a commentary on the efficacy of vaccination.
He noted that vaccination against COVID does not prevent transmission of the disease, but he's not commenting on the efficacy.
Well, okay.
So, let's go back to your amnesty.
If a judge has ruled this, then you're wrong about everything, aren't you?
So what does that have to do with anything?
She goes on to write, obviously, some people intended to mislead and make wildly irresponsible claims.
Remember when public health community had to spend a lot of time and resources urging Americans not to inject themselves with bleach?
And that's made up.
Because Donald Trump was talking about disinfectants.
And he said, is there a way that we could maybe put in the lungs or inject something or inject it somehow?
Trump did not come out and tell people to inject bleach.
So, they actually do have a UV light lung therapy thing.
It's experimental, but people found the videos.
I digress.
Obviously, some people intended, she says.
That was bad.
Misinformation was and remains a huge problem.
But most errors were made by people who are working in the earnest of the good of society.
Okay, so what you're saying is that due to your false reporting, you now think Trump should be forgiven for something he did not say.
Trump says some stupid things, don't get me wrong, but he never said to do anything.
He said could.
Is it possible?
And you can argue it's a dumb question, fine, but that's all it was, right?
Okay.
Given the amount of uncertainty, almost every position was taken on every topic.
And in every topic, someone was eventually proved right.
And someone else proved wrong.
In some instances, the right people were right for the wrong reasons.
In other instances, they had a prescient understanding of the available information.
The people who got it right, for whatever reason, may want to gloat.
Those who got it wrong, for whatever reason, may feel defensive and retrench into a position that doesn't accord with the facts.
No, no, no.
I'll just pause you right there and say this.
Accountability is coming.
There is no forgiveness.
I don't care if you did the right thing.
Or were trying to do the right thing, I should say.
Let me give you an example.
Let's say there is a man.
And he is walking down the street, minding his own business.
Boop, boop, boop.
There is another man.
Both of these men are wearing white t-shirts and blue jeans and red hats.
One man is armed with a gun and just shot someone and is screaming, I'm gonna shoot again.
The police respond.
Or let's just say you respond.
Let's say you.
And people are like, watch out, there's a guy with a white t-shirt, blue jeans, and a red hat.
He's armed, and he's shooting people.
And sure enough, there you see this man.
You see this man, and so you say, freeze, don't move.
And the guy reaches into his pocket, or into his waist, so you shoot him.
You were told that a guy with a red hat, white t-shirt, and blue jeans was shooting people.
He was reaching for something.
I was scared.
This was the guy.
Uh-oh.
It was the wrong guy.
He didn't hear you.
Kind of far away.
Yeah, you're probably going to get held to account to a certain degree.
That doesn't mean you're going to go to jail, but you could have to pay hefty fines, maybe you'll be charged for wrongful death or something, and be responsible for ending someone's life.
When you try to citizen's arrest someone, now certain states have different laws, but in most circumstances, as my understanding, I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that if you screw up, you're civilly responsible, you can be sued.
So let's talk about what accountability means.
You can do something for all the right reasons and screw up.
And you have to pay for your mistakes.
Let me give you an even more simple example.
If I hire a plumber and the plumber comes to my house to fix a toilet and he's like, I'm going to try and fix this.
But then he breaks a pipe, spraying water everywhere and causing damage.
That's his fault.
That's it.
I mean, how about you're at a grocery store and you slip and fall, right?
They had just cleaned the floors, didn't realize it was slippery.
They were trying to actually make things better and someone got hurt.
You're responsible when you make a mistake.
It's just that simple.
You want amnesty?
No.
Accountability cometh for you.
Here we go.
We have to put these fights aside and declare a pandemic amnesty.
We can leave out the willful purveyors of actual misinformation while forgiving the hard calls that people had no choice but to make with imperfect knowledge.
Los Angeles County closed its beaches in the summer of 2020.
Why?
There was no data suggesting shutting a beach down made sense.
And there was a guy who was surfing or something.
He was paddle boarding.
And the cops chased him down.
He was by himself.
There was a lady who was live streaming in her own store in New Jersey.
closed but she was filming on Facebook saying who wants to buy some of the stuff the cops came and
said stop or else in Michigan they said you weren't allowed to buy seeds none of that had
anything to do with the lockdowns. Nice try. We need to learn from our mistakes and let them go.
We need to forgive the attacks, too.
Because I thought schools should reopen and argue that kids as a group were not at high risk.
I was called a teacher killer.
And a genocide-er.
It wasn't pleasant, but feelings were high.
And I certainly don't need to dissect and rehash that time for the rest of my days.
You see what this is?
I was telling them they were wrong, but we should forgive them.
No.
We should vote on Republicans who host inquiries and panels and get Fauci under oath.
Moving on is crucial now because the pandemic created many problems that we still need to solve.
Student test scores have shown historic declines, more so in math and reading, and more so for students who are disadvantaged at the start.
We need to collect data, experiment, and invest.
Is high dosage tutoring more or less cost effective than extended school years?
Why have some states recovered faster than others?
I wonder which ones recovered faster than others.
How about that?
How's Florida doing?
We should focus on questions like these because answering them is how we will help our children recover.
Many people have neglected their health care over the past several years.
Notably, routine vaccination rates for children are way down.
Rather than debating the role that messaging about COVID vaccines had in its decline, we need to put all our energy into bringing these rates back up.
Pediatricians and public health officials will need to work together on community outreach, and politicians will need to consider school mandates.
The standard saying is that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
But dwelling on the mistakes of history can lead to a repetitive doom loop as well.
Let's acknowledge that we make complicated choices in the face of deep uncertainty, and then try to work together to build back and move forward.
That's right!
Remembering history can also make it loop.
Not learning from history is the problem.
And so I've learned something.
I've learned something.
It is not to let despots get away with the crimes they commit.
And although I'm not saying that every single person needs to be locked in jail for what they did, some do, some don't, but accountability is a requirement.
At the very least, I can say if you're a public official who advocated for failure, you should leave and resign in disgrace.
And I'll accept that.
I mean, if you were a small-time public official who said, look, they're saying we should lock down.
I think it's a good idea.
I get it.
You made a mistake.
You tried to do the right thing.
But why the authoritarianism?
You should be responsible to everyone whose lives you destroyed.
You shouldn't be able to just walk away and say, hey, well, you know, I... No.
Authoritarianism isn't the answer.
If people don't want to get sick, they can stay home.
Shutting down Applebee's never made any sense.
Except for the fact that you, the privileged elites, were scared.
This world still exists in China.
And so let me make sure it's fresh within your memory what they did to you.
From the Daily Mail.
Families run to the exit at Shanghai Disneyland as thousands of people are locked in and barred from leaving over COVID scare.
Take a look at this.
Man, what a way to live.
Shanghai Disneyland has barred thousands from leaving the Magic Kingdom after locking down the entire resort due to a COVID outbreak.
All visitors in the park at the time of the announcement have been ordered to stay inside until they can provide a negative test for the virus.
And it's probably not even that.
Probably what happened is someone had a high temperature.
That's it.
They scan your head.
They have these cops wearing heat vision thermals.
Thermal visors or whatever.
They look around and they can see the temperature of people.
And if someone's too hot, they flag you or something.
I think the AI does.
And then, your QR code changes colors.
So probably what happened here at the Disney Resort, someone had to scan to get in the building and it went wham!
Your temperature is too high.
Your scan is bad.
And so they locked the whole thing down.
Ain't nobody leaving because we do not want COVID.
Footage shared on Weibo showed panicked guests rushing to the park's gates to escape only to find them locked.
Around 60,000 visitors enter the park each day.
Authorities moved to shut it down after only 10 locally transmitted cases were reported across Shanghai yesterday, all of which it said were people without symptoms.
The resort said at 11.39am today it would immediately shut the main theme park and surrounding areas, including its shopping street, until further notice to comply with the virus curbs.
Interesting.
Check it out.
The Shanghai government said in its official WeChat account the park was barring people from entering and exiting and that all visitors inside the site would need to await the results of the tests before they could leave.
Anyone who had visited the park since October 27th would also need to test for COVID three times in three days.
The theme park continued to operate rides for visitors stuck in the park during the closure on Monday, social media users reported.
That's really funny.
A Shanghai Disney Report spokesperson said the resort was still operating limited offerings and that they were following measures in line with guidelines from Chinese health authorities.
The resort had, on Saturday, said that it had started operating with a reduced workforce to comply with COVID measures.
The closure marks the latest disruption for the Shanghai Disney Resort, which was shut for over three months during Shanghai's lockdown earlier this year.
So how, what say you?
Good sirs and madams?
You gonna forgive anybody for the things they did?
You gonna forgive them for the, what, 15,000 dead in New York?
You gonna forgive them for the damage they caused to your kids?
For the social problems your kids will endure because of this?
Because they're despots?
What about the guy in Michigan?
The barber in the small town?
And they shut him down.
What about Nancy Pelosi who went and got her hair done because, well, you know, it's important.
What about Lori Lightfoot?
I have to look good, so I'm allowed.
You're not.
You're really gonna forgive those people?
Of course we aren't.
You have the nerve, The Atlantic, to publish an article calling for amnesty?
When we watched Newsom go out to eat at a fancy French restaurant with no mask on?
When Nancy Pelosi went and got her hair cut and said, It was a trap!
It was a trap!
No one else was allowed to run their business, but you were?
What about the salon owner in Texas?
Who was arrested.
What about the cafe owner from, I think it was Iowa or South Dakota?
Not South Dakota, because they didn't lock down.
I think it was Iowa.
What about the cafe owner who got arrested?
What about in New York?
Where they actually had a block from a bar, everything was open and fine, but south of it, I think it was in Staten Island, it was closed.
And so this bar owner says, it makes no sense that a block away they can keep their business open and I can't, and I have to suffer.
The cops showed up.
They weren't even sung.
They said, you know what?
Door's open.
Food's free.
And people were hanging out.
Free food and drink.
And the cops still came and shut it down.
Despite the fact it was private at that point.
Are we going to forgive any of these people?
I refuse.
In fact, no.
I demand.
Go out and vote.
Get your friends to vote before it's too late.
Ask them if they enjoyed being locked down.
Ask them if they enjoyed what happened to their kids.
Ask them if they enjoy $5 a gallon gas.
Get them to vote.
And then we will demand that the Republicans who come in hold inquiries as to how this stuff happened.
And we want accountability.
In fact, I'll put it a little bit more than that.
I don't want just accountability in the sense that we want inquiries.
No, no, no.
I would like to see Cuomo go to jail for murder.
They had the comfort.
I believe it was the comfort.
The naval medical vessel.
They didn't even use it.
They could have.
Instead, Cuomo said, just put the recovering patients in the nursing homes.
And he was explicitly warned that will kill people.
And he said, so what?
Something has to be done about this.
We cannot just sit back and ignore all of these things.
So, as the panic sets in, as we get closer and closer to the midterms, and many expect there's going to be a red wave, fingers crossed there is, because who knows?
Especially with what's going on in Pennsylvania.
Who knows?
If it be the case that Republicans do win, then accountability we demand.
Inquiries, subpoenas, the works.
The same is true for state legislatures.
If you're in a state that has a Republican legislature, you better demand that they start working on criminal referrals for these despots that killed people.
