The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
1A: “Nor shall the government exert any pressure upon public discourse.” (DM
Poast new message in this thread
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:34 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig “I read the whole Constitution and that’s what it says!” (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697768) |
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:39 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank What does abridge mean to you? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697789) |
 |
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:41 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig What does “make no law” mean to you? Since that’s the overriding clause, I think you need to first explain how “sending emails” is basically “making laws.” (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697800) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:43 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank So your argument is that the Executive can circumvent the 1A at will since it is not Congress? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697805) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:43 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Your RC is extremely low if that’s what you concluded from my post. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697812) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:46 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank You’re being a kikey pedant EPAH. I took your narrow gotcha and generalized it to show how idiotic it was
Can the executive violate the 1A outside of any laws on the books via its actions? Yes or no?
There is likely no law by Congress stating we can shut down churches at will in the country. Can the POTUS thus shut down all churches in the country? |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:49 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Of course. It can arrest/fine people based on the content of their speech, seize copies of newspapers, etc.
PS: “you’re being pedantic” is how a stupid person often responds to the argument of a smart person. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:50 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank >>>Of course. It can arrest/fine people based on the content of their speech, seize copies of newspapers, etc.
We are discussing protected speech that did not run afoul of any laws, EPAH. Please keep up
I would also love to see examples where courts have ruled it ok for the executive to seize newspapers |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:52 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig But what “pressure” was exerted? That USG would run a DDOS operation against Twitter, issue fines, arrest its employees?
Edit: seizing newspapers would obv be a violation. Are you paying full attention to ITT? |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:53 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank Moving goalpoasts EPAH
>>> But what “pressure” was exerted? That USG would run a DDOS operation against Twitter, issue fines, arrest its employees?
And you also know full well the USG has been threatening twitter with onerous restrictions and regulations in the background since 2016 |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:55 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig What are you even talking about. You’re the one saying it’s a 1A violation, and I’m asking how 1A was violated. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697854) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:57 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank With the implicit threat of onerous regulation and reprisals against it if it were not to cooperate, Twitter banned protected speech at the behest of the US Government. How is that not a blatant 1A violation?
Your answer, literally, was “it was emails and not a law” |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:59 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig “threat of onerous regulation and reprisals against it if it were not to cooperate”
This is HUGE if true. Can you repost the emails constituting this “threat”? |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:05 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank Courts have found no explicit threats to be necessary for 1A violations to occur See: Rattner vs. Netburn Okwedy vs. Molinari
But you are not arguing in good faith here. The government is literally holding a gun to Twitter’s head and telling them they are free to do what they want. You know that |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:08 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig “The government is literally holding a gun to Twitter’s head”
This sounds horrible. Out the emails! The people must know the truth!! |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:10 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank Nonresponsive. You’ve conceded the point (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697913) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:19 AM Author: jet goal in life The branches thing is debated, apparently: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol40/iss3/2/
The crux is your apparent belief that gov is holding a “gun to the head” of Twitter where there is a provable demand to alter speech or face penalties. The standard you’re applying (good enough to satisfy an alt-right podcaster, I assume) isn’t the one used by courts, and that includes conservative judges. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:21 AM Author: Sticky Messiness if twitter didn't play ball there were a hundred different ways to make the company suffer, even if it would be difficult to prove in a court of law.
let me give you an example with another company.
Patrick Byrne, the former CEO of overstock.com, went public in 2019 with allegations of political espionage by FBI figures including FBI agent Peter Strzok. In a Fox Business interview, Byrne described how he was offered a $1 billion bribe of sorts to stay quiet. In 2018 Overstock was subject to a SEC investigation; Peter Strzok’s wife, Melissa Hodgman, happened to be the Associate Director of the SEC Enforcement Division who happened to be leading the SEC investigation of Patrick Byrne’s company. Per the blogger Sundance, “So the wife of the FBI agent who was directing Patrick Byrne in the sketchy FBI operation targeting Donald Trump… just happens to open an investigation of Byrne shortly after the corrupt FBI operation containing her husband first hit the headlines in early 2018. I wonder if the elimination of that SEC investigation was worth, oh, say $1 billion. Huh, imagine that? Coincidences. Small world.” Byrne resigned from Overstock out of concern it would be targeted due to his whistleblowing.
that's just one example. this slimy game is a big part of the reason why trust in government is so low. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:23 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig “We all know how the game is played folks. They obviously did it.”
QED |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:24 AM Author: jet goal in life Excellent illustration of my point, thanks (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697973) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:23 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank https://reason.com/volokh/2021/07/19/when-government-urges-private-entities-to-restrict-others-speech/
On the other hand, where courts find that the government speech implicitly threatened retaliation, rather than simply exhorting or encouraging third parties to block speech, that's unconstitutional. The Supreme Court case on that is Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan (1963), where a state commission threatened to prosecute stores that sold books that it viewed as pornography (including books that were actually protected by the First Amendment). And lower court cases have applied that even absent express threat of prosecution, for instance:
[1.] The mayor and a trustee of a New York town sent a letter to a newspaper demanding to learn more about who was involved in an article critical of local officials. Potentially unconstitutional, the Second Circuit held in Rattner v. Netburn (1991)
[2.] The President of the Borough of Staten Island sent a letter to a billboard company urging it to take down an anti-homosexuality billboard… Potentially unconstitutional, the Second Circuit held in Okwedy v. Molinari (2003)
[3.] The Sheriff of Cook County (Illinois) sent letters to Mastercard and Visa… Potentially unconstitutional, the Seventh Circuit held in Backpage.com, LLC v. Dart (2015) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:30 AM Author: jet goal in life Ya know the whole Jewy “but where do we draw the liiiine?” joke? That’s what would be done here. Also, I’m certain that for each of these cases there are 10 that say an “implicit” (ie at most insinuated) threat wasn’t enough.
I’ll admit, as a lib, that I would probably be pissed if the Trump admin had leaned on Twitter in the way that the Biden admin allegedly did here. I would not claim a 1A violation based on the evidence reported, such as it is |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:31 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank What about the backdrop of nonstop government threats to bring the hammer down on Twitter via restrictions and regulations? Does that not provide sufficient background for an implicit threat that they did not play ball?
Also, the burden of proof is on you on providing court cases that show implicit threats were not sufficient. Until then I have provided several examples that show my interpretation is correct |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:36 AM Author: jet goal in life Not really, or at most circumstantially. Twitter is in a regulated space, before and independently of the alleged coercion. (You may think it shouldn’t be, but that’s not germane here.) So while the tools to coerce are there, their mere existence is not enough to prove or even infer coercion on these discrete issues. You actually would need evidence of a threat connecting the two. Otherwise gov could never “ask” Twitter to do anything lest it be 1A-violating coercion under your test.
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:38 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank >>> Otherwise gov could never “ask” Twitter to do anything lest it be 1A-violating coercion under your test.
My test is that the gov is asking it to directly violate the bill of rights via proxy, not for shit like user stats
They were literally telling Twitter to take down jokes |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:42 AM Author: jet goal in life Errr I don’t know how you misunderstood me but you did. Not talking about user stats, and you saying gov is asking Twitter to violate 1A begs the question.
I understand that Gov is seeking to persuade Twitter to modify its speech (or its users’ speech). THE question is whether that request rises to unconstitutional compulsion. My point was that the background existence of regulatory risk, not specifically connected to these requests, is likely not enough and shouldn’t be |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 6:30 AM Author: Jet-lagged Internet-worthy Jew Bawdyhouse I think he was responding to this ridiculous straw man:
“ Otherwise gov could never “ask” Twitter to do anything lest it be 1A-violating coercion under your test.”
You seemed to be making the point that applying the 1A in the way DM conceives of it would hamstring the USG from any meaningful regulation of social media. In your response, you now seem to be suggesting you only ever meant regulating speech. Okay, but just realize that totally undercuts your point because the obvious retort is — wait, why exactly is the USG regulating perfectly legal political speech on a social media platform? In other words, if the prompt goes from asking “anything” as you put it to asking “to take down political speech” then I’ve lost the point of your statement which I assumed was an attempt to convince us that OF COURSE the USG needs to ask for SOME things. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:42 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig “nonstop government threats to bring the hammer down on Twitter via restrictions and regulations?” Gonna need some links here, Champ. Only threats I remember were from xoHawley and xoMTG. Or did the FBI get to those patriots too??? |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:40 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank A quick google search found the following:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/08/facebook-twitter-congress-trump-riot/
https://time.com/5387560/senate-intelligence-hearing-facebook-twitter/
xoxo hth
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:00 AM Author: Sticky Messiness its useless discussing anything with epah, he doesn't argue in good faith
but really, violations of the 1st amendment have been egregious in US history and there's no response to it. look up what happened to father coughlin, USG shut down his newspaper, banned him from the airwaves and pressured the vatican to kick him out of the church. there are a lot of examples like this.
the USG doesn't abide by the constitution except when its useful to its interests, and thats all there is to it |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:09 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig It’s only “useless” for retards who can’t use logic to support their arguments. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697909) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:20 AM Author: Primrose Splenetic Chad the government made twitter an agent of the government paokdneapoewiuruqopiwjnavpoknsd violation of the 1a results you know this and you also know had this been trump's doj, you would go insane |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:34 AM Author: submissive shrine mother u got BTFO, honey
and I say this as a media law lawyer with a pedigree as good as yours |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:44 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Really doubt that, Champ. But I can’t wait for the 1A lawsuits over this strong claim. (Or perhaps FBI is threatening them not to sue??) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698025) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:03 AM Author: submissive shrine mother it's all true. and I was a Truman Scholar in addition to being a Fulbright Fellow, champ. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698045) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:17 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Great pumo alt, VC
Edit: I’m j/k bro, but as a media lawyer can you outline a complaint you could file on these facts that you think would survive an MTD before any federal judge other than xoAileen Cannon? |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:44 AM Author: jet goal in life Want to weigh in then? You may be only person ITT that knows what they’re talking about. DM reads a lot of shit but cherry-picks both his facts and his understanding of the law, so he doesn’t have a full picture and is ultimately unpersuasive (at least to this lawyer) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698026) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:59 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman When the FBI emails a corporation, demanding that the company remove posts, obviously there is pressure applied to the corporation to comply. The random corporate lawyer doesn’t want to get blamed if some crime is committed or whatever so it’s much easier to just comply.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the FBI requesting takedowns of illegal material or posts that further crimes. The issue here is that the FBI wasn’t investigating illegal behavior, which is it’s mandate. It was going far beyond that in demanding the removal of perfectly legal content. If the FBI was targeting BLM in the same way libs would be up in arms.
Moreover, the FBI influenced Twitter to ban the Hunter Biden laptop story, implying it was Russian disinformation, when the FBI itself had a copy of the laptop and knew it wasn’t disinformation. It seems pretty intuitive that we don’t want the FBI getting involved in overtly political issues with such misleading misrepresentations. Isn’t that exactly the type of things criticize about the FBI’s behavior in the 1960s? |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:01 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Post the emails. I have to confess that I haven’t read them like you and DM apparently have. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697878) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:09 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman 12. And yet, during all of 2020, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies repeatedly primed Yoel Roth to dismiss reports of Hunter Biden’s laptop as a Russian “hack and leak” operation.
This is from a sworn declaration by Roth given in December 2020.
fec.gov/files/legal/mu…
30. Efforts continued to influence Twitter's Yoel Roth.
In Sept 2020, Roth participated in an Aspen Institute “tabletop exercise” on a potential "Hack-and-Dump" operation relating to Hunter Biden
The goal was to shape how the media covered it — and how social media carried it.
On Oct 14, shortly after @NYPost publishes its Hunter Biden laptop story, Roth says, “it isn’t clearly violative of our Hacked Materials Policy, nor is it clearly in violation of anything else," but adds, “this feels a lot like a somewhat subtle leak operation.”
And yet it's inconceivable Baker believed the Hunter Biden emails were either fake or hacked. The @nypost had included a picture of the receipt signed by Hunter Biden, and an FBI subpoena showed that the agency had taken possession of the laptop in December 2019. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:10 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig 1A: “Nor shall the government shape how the media covered it — and how social media carried it.“ (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697916) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:32 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman I haven’t even argued that this was necessarily a first amendment violation. Not sure why you keep making shitty strawman. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697999) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 6:34 AM Author: Jet-lagged Internet-worthy Jew Bawdyhouse LOL at EPAH acting like he earnestly wants to understand the facts based on your simple argument that we don’t want the FBI behaving this way only for him to default back to the 1A when confronted with those facts. So disingenuous. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698332) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:10 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman I tried to copy and paste a few of the key summary tweets but you should at least familiarize yourself with the issue if you want to discuss it seriously.
This was the Michael Schellenberger Twitter drop. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:12 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Literally everything these guys are posting are their own interpretations of things they’ve been “told.” But someone at Twitter must possess the actual emails, right? Or the FBI has special self-destructing emails like in Inspector Gadget? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697927) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:14 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Dude are you stupid or dishonest? These are all coming from emails. They quote the emails for all of this. And other docs too.
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:20 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig That’s crazy that they quote the emails, but none of you will repost them here to demonstrate the coercion the govt applied. I guess I need to do my own research so I can know as much as you guys do. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697961) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:22 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman https://twitter.com/shellenbergermd/status/1604871630613753856?s=46&t=72OY2Ir6a-YWkQ8iI4pvyQ
Read the thread dumbass. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:25 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Read the thread. Didn’t see the coercive emails. Which one stood out the MOST to you? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697978) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:27 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman If you were capable of following my thread here, you would see I was posting a thread showing that the FBI influenced Twitter to block the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation even though the FBI knew it was not disinformation but authentic. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697985) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:37 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Horrible for the Trump administration to have done this. But at any rate, ITT is about 1A, so what is the violation you perceive from what the Chris Wray FBI did? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698010) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:55 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman I never made any arguments about the First Amendment, as I said earlier.
Yes, it is undesirable for the FBI to dishonestly cause social media companies suppress truthful stories based on false national security concerns, regardless of which administration is in power. That doesn’t seem to matter to you, which is fine I guess. It also doesn’t matter to you that you know absolutely zero about this story when you came in here opining on it. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:11 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Oh so you came to argue a point that’s unrelated to ITT? That’s useful, thanks. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698057) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:12 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Here’s a 1A argument: the FBI paid Twitter to act on its behalf, making Twitter an agent of the government and thus subject to first amendment scrutiny: “The FBI paid Twitter millions of dollars to cover the costs of processing the agency's requests. "I am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019!" wrote someone with Twitter's Safety, Content, & Law Enforcement (SCALE) team in a February 2021 email, according to internal messages reported by journalist Michael Shellenberger today.“
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:16 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig “I am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019!"
This is very strong evidence if only we had any info on the “from whom” part other than Shellenberger’s inferences. Why wouldn’t Elon be touting how many millions Twitter got from the FBI if it did? |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:18 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman So you are disputing that the FBI made these payments? Let’s be clear on what you are arguing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698085) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:33 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Yes I’m HIGHLY doubting this. Why would it? And Elon is just repeating what Shellenberger intuited. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698110) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:40 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig You’ll wanna read this to understand: https://www.pcmag.com/news/ex-facebook-exec-calls-musks-twitter-fbi-payment-claims-false (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698119) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:46 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Yeah Elon doesn’t have access to this information, he’s just repeating what a journalist said…about files that Elon gave him. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698128) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:21 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Also Elon literally touted it. I love how you make arguments from a complete place of ignorance. Really easy to blow you the fuck out.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1605219914813673473?s=46&t=l9fLn91gZABenWbfbshmNg |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 6:36 AM Author: Jet-lagged Internet-worthy Jew Bawdyhouse EPAH btfo yet again — just slinks away (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698334) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:13 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Like how I slow played that one to fuck you in the ass? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698066) |
|
Date: December 28th, 2022 7:03 PM Author: orange dilemma (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45708443) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:12 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Here’s a 1A argument: the FBI paid Twitter to act on its behalf, making Twitter an agent of the government and thus subject to first amendment scrutiny:
“The FBI paid Twitter millions of dollars to cover the costs of processing the agency's requests. "I am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019!" wrote someone with Twitter's Safety, Content, & Law Enforcement (SCALE) team in a February 2021 email, according to internal messages reported by journalist Michael Shellenberger today.“ |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:16 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Also, the FBI did have secure communication links with documents sent to Twitter that automatically expired/destroyed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697947) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:22 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Good enough for me. We can just assume that these no-longer-available (nor screenshotted) communications were HIGHLY COERCIVE. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697964) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:24 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman There are literally screen shot of the secure message link.
“Many requests arrived via Teleporter, a one-way platform in which many communications were timed to vanish:“
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1606701441384865793?s=46&t=qJ85i2JKQYWR7VshFEjtwg |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:27 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Oh fuck. Just IMAGINE what was in that Teleporter link. Probably threatened the arrest of @jack unless they complied. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697982) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:28 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Typical lib cope.
It doesn’t exist! It never happened! But if it happened, it was a good thing!
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:29 AM Author: Sticky Messiness https://americanmind.org/salvo/thats-not-happening-and-its-good-that-it-is/ (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697992) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:17 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman (1) The FBI never sent the emails;
(2) If the FBI did send the emails, it did nothing wrong.
(3) if the FBI did something wrong, it’s Trump’s fault anyways.
That’s where we are with EPAH’s arguments. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:23 AM Author: Sticky Messiness yet you continue to argue with him, why?
its the same issue i have with the state of american law. (insert zeitgeist here) is obviously a smart, successful attorney and knows how judges would look at an issue like this. but the shitlibs working in these government orgs -- many of whom are also attorneys, like james comey and andy mccabe -- generally know what to put into writing, what not to put into writing, and how to phrase things to avoid smoking gun incrimination. hell, even when mccabe got caught red-handed and fired for cause and lost his pension, he was then hired by CNN and ultimately had his pension reinstated, lol. and then the FBI phones were mysteriously wiped a year or two after Trump took office and the inspector general was looking into their activity.
this isn't a republican or democrat issue; it is a establishment vs populist issue. unfortunately D.C. has developed a class consciousness of its own and protects its own against outsiders. so how can one hope for justice from the judicial system with a system so obviously corrupted?
unfortunately as i mentioned above with the father coughlin example this isn't anything new and it's been like this before we were alive, we're just much more aware of it now. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:30 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman I’m on paternity leave and I enjoy discrediting bad arguments, no other reason.
Agree with all of the above.
I’ll take EPAH’s failure to respond further as a sign of complete victory. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:29 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Sounds like we’re all imagining the threats or non-threats. If only someone knew the truth and could expose it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697993) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:42 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman I guess refusing to engage is what you want do to here. That’s fine, you came into this thread with a very strong opinion about facts you know nothing about, and you will leave the thread this way.
Personally I have a problem with the FBI misrepresenting to the news media that a truthful story is false based on trumped up national security concerns. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:47 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Still waiting on the “facts” there, chief. Haven’t seen anything other than “the FBI sent emails to Twitter” so far. Please post the MOST damning facts in this subthread so I can focus on them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698029) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:50 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman I don’t know how many times I can summarize the issue for you. I can’t post screen caps of emails on XO. You came into this thread completely ignorant of the story and you will leave the thread that way. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698032) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:14 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Based on the topic of the thread I started, I had assumed that people would be making legal arguments ITT. If your point is only “it would have been better policy for the govt not to have taken any position on Hunter,” that would have been a great topic sentence for your first post ITT. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698069) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:15 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Here’s a 1A argument: the FBI paid Twitter to act on its behalf, making Twitter an agent of the government and thus subject to first amendment scrutiny: “The FBI paid Twitter millions of dollars to cover the costs of processing the agency's requests. "I am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019!" wrote someone with Twitter's Safety, Content, & Law Enforcement (SCALE) team in a February 2021 email, according to internal messages reported by journalist Michael Shellenberger today.“
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:19 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig But the Twitter employee didn’t disclose the source of the $3M that was unearthed only by a rando on Twitter? Strong evidence there chief (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698087) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:24 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman can’t tell if you are trolling at this point. These are from twitter’s internal files that were shared by Elon with journalists.
Are you disputing that the FBI made these payments? The FBI has not disputed it. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:35 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Yea I’m disputing it. It makes zero sense, and could be very easily proven but hasn’t been. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698113) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:39 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman We have Twitter’s internal emails confirming that the payments were made. We have Elon saying the payments were made. The FBI has not disputed making the payments (although it has otherwise commented on the story). The evidence is undisputed here. If you have contrary evidence, be my guest.
But absent any contrary evidence, this fact has been established. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:41 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Kindly read this and revert: https://www.pcmag.com/news/ex-facebook-exec-calls-musks-twitter-fbi-payment-claims-false
Literally zero to do with Hunter or suppressing heroic patriotic conservative beliefs about vaccines. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:43 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman The payments were for processing the takedown requests of many different types. Sorry bro, you lose. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698124) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 4:08 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig “were for processing the takedown requests”
On what basis did you reach this conclusion? The pcmag article I posted explained the years’ total of payments. Or you suspect pcmag was separately paid to throw patriots off the scent? |
|
Date: December 31st, 2022 2:09 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Payments were made to the trust and safety team for their time which was the same team processing the takedown requests.
|
|
Date: December 31st, 2022 2:13 AM Author: harsh indian lodge fat ankles convenient that you left out "shall"
what does "shall make no law" mean to you?
what does "shall not be infringed" mean to you? |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:54 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Weird how libs love the FBI now when in 2016 the FBI was to blame for getting Trump elected. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697851) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 12:58 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig “in 2016 the FBI was to blame for getting Trump elected.”
My own view is that agencies are either 100% right across history or 100% wrong, and that people should just say they either support everything or nothing that an agency does. You too? |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:01 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Or you can try and apply a consistent ethical principal that the FBI should attempt to minimize overt political actions that may influence elections across both scenarios. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697876) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:03 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig The Hilary thing wasn’t overtly political afaict. But you feel like discouraging COVID misinformation was? My recollection is that xoTrump was very proud of Operation Warpspeed but maybe I’m misrecalling
Edit: nope I remembered right: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-operation-warp-speed-vaccine-summit/ |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:13 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman So your view is that the Hillary email issue didn’t have overtly political effects?
It’s clear you don’t know what the facts are here. The FBI did much more than “discourage Covid misinformation,” (which Twitter believes includes Shadowbannimg Stanford professors who were at least arguably largely correct about the effects of the pandemic.)
The FBI was flagging all sort of legal materials, simply, for example, being “anti-Ukraine” or “pro-Maduro.” To be sure I’m personally pro-Ukraine and Anti-Maduro, but the FBI shouldn’t be influencing Twitter to ban accounts because it disagrees with the messages.
Edit: I have no idea what relevance operation warp speed has to this issue. None at all. You are completely missing the point. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:17 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig So now we’ve retreated from “overtly political” to “political effects”? I remain of the belief that it doesn’t violate 1A for the government to take actions that have political effects.
As for “the FBI did much more than…”, this would all be shown by the emails. If ONLY the people trumpeting these emails somehow had access to them… |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:19 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Wtf dude this is all from the emails. There are lengthy threads quoting them.
Now you are quibbling about the word overtly like a shit lawyer. |
|
Date: December 28th, 2022 7:05 PM Author: orange dilemma BTFO (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45708448) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:16 AM Author: Aquamarine Wonderful Cuckold “Nor shall the government exert any pressure upon public discourse.”
of course they can exert pressure. they can exert pressure by speaking. what they can't do it coerce private actors to censor free speech. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:19 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig You’ve seen the emails showing coercion too?? Seems like everyone ITT has read them, but refrains from posting this ironclad proof. Weird. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697955) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:25 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman sorry man we just assumed you actually read the Twitter threads at the core of this discussion when you started opining on them. Now I’ve linked some of them for you and perhaps you can try to participate in good faith. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697979) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:29 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig That one? I had read it, but didn’t see any coercion. Which of the emails struck you as the MOST threatening? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697989) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:30 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank Is your argument that there must be explicit coercion by the government for this to be a 1A violation! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45697995) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:39 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Not necessarily “explicit.” But *some coercion, yes. Can you post the email showing the STRONGEST coercion? Or was that one of the ones set to auto-delete, such that we have nothing but Taibi’s interpretation (of an email he didn’t read) to work from in reaching our conclusions? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698016) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 1:48 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Taibbi quoted the exact emails he uses in support of his arguments. Why are you acting so dumb?
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:07 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman I’d also add, as a plaintiffs lawyer, you know it is improper to unduly focus on single allegations out of context. To understand the conduct at issue, you need to look at all of the allegations together. So your demand that we identify a single damning email isn’t quite fair when the discussion here is about an entire course of conduct by the FBI that influenced Twitter to suppress Twitter accounts at the FBI’s direction.
Notably the FBI actually paid Twitter millions of dollars during this engagement which provides some evidence that Twitter acted on behalf of the government and this may be subject to first amendment. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 9:44 AM Author: Aquamarine Wonderful Cuckold "I’d also add, as a plaintiffs lawyer, you know it is improper to unduly focus on single allegations out of context. To understand the conduct at issue, you need to look at all of the allegations together. So your demand that we identify a single damning email isn’t quite fair when the discussion here is about an entire course of conduct by the FBI that influenced Twitter to suppress Twitter accounts at the FBI’s direction."
===
exactly.
defendants explain away illegal conduct like that. "so my client pulled out his phone. there is nothing illegal or sinister about that act. people pull out their phones all the time, every day. then my client typed the first word in his text to co-defendant. there was nothing sinister about that word. it's a word people use every day, all the time. ...." |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 9:45 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank It’s very kikey. Epah simply acts like a dissembling Jew 24/7 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698745) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:09 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman “The FBI paid Twitter millions of dollars to cover the costs of processing the agency's requests. "I am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019!" wrote someone with Twitter's Safety, Content, & Law Enforcement (SCALE) team in a February 2021 email, according to internal messages reported by journalist Michael Shellenberger today.“ (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698049) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:13 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman EPAH got blown the fuck out here.
FBI paid Twitter millions to act on its behalf in suppressing speech by banning accounts. Sounds like a First Amendment violation to me!
“The FBI paid Twitter millions of dollars to cover the costs of processing the agency's requests. "I am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019!" wrote someone with Twitter's Safety, Content, & Law Enforcement (SCALE) team in a February 2021 email, according to internal messages reported by journalist Michael Shellenberger today.“
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:43 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig My response is that you’re retarded: https://www.pcmag.com/news/ex-facebook-exec-calls-musks-twitter-fbi-payment-claims-false
Next you’ll tell us that “Twitter paid the government MILLIONS to curry favor” (but you will be unknowingly referring to *taxes) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:45 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Oh wow! Someone who worked at Facebook disagrees!
We have the actual emails. They’ve been quoted.
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 3:03 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig *one line* has been quoted.
The thing about shitcons and DM is that they’re gullible as fuck. You can’t take 5 mins to read the article so you can understand what the payments were for, becaus me it’s so much easier to just read xoElon’s 13-word Tweet. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 3:15 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Not so guillable as to allow my kids to identify as trans because of social pressure in the Bay Area!
All the evidence supports me, you just have speculation that maybe the funds were used for a proper purpose, not takedown requests, which again is directly contrary to the evidence here. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 3:56 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig Bro I like you as a poster, but your reasoning ITT is incredibly stupid. If you suspect the FBI paid Twitter $3.5 to take down posts that the Trump administration (oops, I mean the Biden-controlled deep state that ran things during Trump’s tenure) didn’t like, then why didn’t they release anything but one sentence from this strong email evidence? You suspect the other sentences and emails in that chain were just so strongly corroborative of your inference that they didn’t deem it necessary?
You’re getting dangerously close to the reasoning of renowned board retard Consuela (who I also like): “we all know how the game is played, so they obviously did it and that’s all we need to know.” |
|
Date: December 31st, 2022 4:12 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman no inference, needed, the email expressly says what it says. Twitter’s owner agrees, the FBI hasn’t disputed it (even though they commented on the story). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45720383) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:51 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Lol, this Facebook guy’s entire argument is that there’s a statute that allows Twitter to seek reimbursement for acting on the FBI’s behalf in certain circumstances, and censorship is not listed in the statute, ergo, the FBI was not paying Twitter to censor. In other words he begs the question by simply assuming that the FBI was not violating the statute. Of course that is contrary to the actual emails we have from Twitter regarding the nature of the requests. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698132) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 3:04 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig “for acting on the FBI’s behalf”
Oh you skimmed, but not for comprehension. Carry on—short tweets are so much easier to digest. |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 3:12 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman nothing you’ve said here undermines me. you don’t even have a point, as always. good stuff! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698143) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 3:28 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Also funny that you are trying to own me on the facts, even though when we began this discussion you had never seen any of these Twitter threads or the underlying emails. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698158) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 3:59 AM Author: Plum boyish filthpig We’ve got too many subthread wastelands going at once. But in this one, can you tell me exactly what you think the $3.5 that Twitter invoiced the govt was *for? For suppressing the Hunter story? Banning Berenson or Trump? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698169) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:16 PM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman Time spent processing takedown requests and cooperating with the FBI in doing so generally. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702548) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 2:37 AM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman EPAH your response? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698115) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 6:49 AM Author: Jet-lagged Internet-worthy Jew Bawdyhouse Everyone should have just said “lulz” and left the thread the moment EPAH made clear he hadn’t actually read all the Twitter Files threads. They all took me a combined maybe 20 minutes but busy EPAH (who probably spends hours per week in threads like this one) couldn’t be bothered to go read the source material. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698352) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 10:17 AM Author: Aquamarine Wonderful Cuckold btw, i hoap that anyone interested in this topic has read the David Zweig twitter stream on Biden's censorship.
https://twitter.com/davidzweig/status/1607378386338340867 |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 10:19 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank That's what my original thread was on. Then EPAH spazzed out and made this one (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45698945) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:03 PM Author: thriller yapping degenerate Seems pretty clear from evidence that
(i) the Biden administration repeatedly requested that former NYT journalist Alex Berenson be banned from Twitter for accurately reporting COVID information that was inconvenient to the Biden administration's preferred narrative
(ii) the FBI tricked Twitter and others into censoring the Hunter Biden story by making theme believe it was Russian disinformation when the FBI knew that it was not Russian information |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:11 PM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702516) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:14 PM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman EPAH won’t engage, will just take you down a subthread wasteland of red herrings (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702539) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:17 PM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank ty for having my back ITT friend
|
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:18 PM Author: Excitant institution Uhh he won't engage? Link me to the exact thread where he says outright he will not engage? I'll wait. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702561) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:19 PM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank lmao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702563) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:26 PM Author: alcoholic hall (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702597) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:34 PM Author: Sticky Messiness (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702638) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:36 PM Author: Jet-lagged Internet-worthy Jew Bawdyhouse (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702648) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 9:51 PM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank Just realized this is an Obeezy tactic too. Hmmm (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45703039) |
|
Date: January 4th, 2023 12:01 PM Author: Floppy startling piazza What is? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45740025) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 11:17 PM Author: Garnet high-end skinny woman (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45703676) |
|
Date: December 31st, 2022 1:35 AM Author: fishy bbw psychic (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45720170) |
|
Date: January 4th, 2023 11:36 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45739862) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:18 PM Author: peach razzle-dazzle menage cr. i just scrolled to the bottom and this nails it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702559) |
|
Date: December 27th, 2022 8:35 PM Author: Lime Comical State Puppy You turned your own child into a science experiment. Who gives a fuck what you think about anything? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45702644) |
|
Date: January 4th, 2023 11:36 AM Author: Fragrant bipolar cruise ship tank Where are we on this, EPAH? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5259676&forum_id=2#45739860) |