XPost: alt.politics.org.fbi, alt.politics.congress, alt.politics.corruption   
   XPost: alt.politics.economics, alt.politics.election, alt.politics.misc   
   XPost: alt.politics.obama, alt.politics.scorched-earth, alt.poli   
   ics.socialism.mao   
   XPost: alt.politics.trump, alt.global-warming, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.apocolypse, alt.politics.usa, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   XPost: alt.infowars, alt.beam-me-up.scotty.there-is-no.intellige   
   t-life.down-here, alt.politics.guns   
   XPost: alt.politics.media   
   From: NOT-SURE@idiocracy.gov   
      
   On 12/4/22 3:34 PM, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote:   
   > https://nypost.com/2022/12/03/fbi-big-tech-big-media-partners-in-   
   > collusion/   
   >   
   > The bold release by Elon Musk of Twitter files on how and why employees   
   > blocked The Post’s 2020 bombshell on Hunter Biden’s laptop marks a   
   > defining moment in modern American history. The disturbing details of   
   > arrogance and ignorance revealed the so-called geniuses pulling the   
   > technology levers to be as supernatural as the man behind the curtain in   
   > “The Wizard of Oz.”   
   >   
   > The deflating reaction in both is the same: Is that all there is?   
   >   
   > In this case, no, not by a long shot. For Musk’s revelations must be the   
   > start of a national campaign to expose the entire picture of the unholy   
   > collusion between partisan government censors and Big Tech.   
   >   
   > Consider that Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg recently admitted to podcaster   
   > Joe Rogan the FBI warned the company in the fall of 2020 to watch out for   
   > Russian disinformation schemes.   
   >   
   > “The FBI came to us, some folks on our team, and was like ‘hey, just so   
   > you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of   
   > Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that   
   > basically there’s about to be some kind of dump that’s similar to   
   that.’”   
   >   
   > Zuckerberg said that by way of explaining why Facebook limited and in some   
   > cases blocked users from sharing The Post’s laptop report.   
   >   
   > Twitter obviously got the same warning, which almost certainly involved   
   > James Baker, a former FBI general counsel who was involved in   
   > investigating the Trump campaign in 2016 and now holds a similar position   
   > at Twitter. Naturally, the released files show he was without remorse or   
   > doubt in urging repression of The Post’s story.   
   >   
   > Moreover, as Intercept reporter Lee Fang has detailed and as a former   
   > Twitter official confirmed, the FBI held weekly meetings in Silicon Valley   
   > with tech officials about policing disinformation. Of course, their   
   > definition of disinformation was so broad as to include virtually anything   
   > that made Joe Biden or Democrats look bad.   
   >   
   > But knowing all that, it still would be naive to think we know the whole   
   > story. For example, we don’t know who in the FBI was running the censoring   
   > operation, whether it was a rogue outfit or came from the top. Nor do we   
   > know if the operation continues now.   
   >   
   > We do know the FBI had Hunter Biden’s laptop for a year before The Post   
   > started to reveal the contents. You don’t have to be a cynic to wonder if   
   > the agents waved Facebook and Twitter off the story because they knew it   
   > was true.   
   >   
   > There is also a good chance the censorship effort involved other federal   
   > agencies. Fang and his Intercept colleague Ken Klippenstein reported in   
   > October that documents and court testimony show the Department of Homeland   
   > Security has “an expansive effort . . . to influence tech platforms.”   
   >   
   > Getting to the bottom of this collusion to thwart the First Amendment and   
   > mislead the public is a job custom-made for the hungry young Turks who   
   > will head the investigating committees of the new GOP House majority.   
   >   
   > But hold on — there remains another missing piece of the puzzle: the bell   
   > cows of the mainstream media.   
   >   
   > They, too, avoided touching the initial Hunter scoop — except to try to   
   > knock it down. Why?   
   >   
   > The New York Times, for example, waited four days before printing a lazy   
   > article that tried to undermine the story by saying some Post newsroom   
   > employees were uncertain of its veracity. It’s shocking even now to   
   > realize Times reporters had access to Tony Bobulinski, Hunter Biden’s   
   > former partner, but refused to print that he confirmed the authenticity of   
   > the email naming Joe Biden as “the big guy” slated for a secret 10% cut   
   in   
   > a joint venture with a Chinese conglomerate.   
   >   
   > There are two basic possibilities for explaining media complicity. First,   
   > perhaps the Times, Washington Post, CNN and others, all of whom are often   
   > favored with partisan leaks from the Justice Department, got misled by the   
   > FBI into thinking the story was bogus.   
   >   
   > Did Big Guy profit?   
   > Indeed, since then, they and other media laptop deniers have authenticated   
   > key contents, though in a scattered fashion that has left unexplored the   
   > central issue of Joe Biden’s role.   
   >   
   > Did the president of the United States profit from the selling of access   
   > to him, and is he compromised in dealing with foreign powers? No one in   
   > Big Media seems to care.   
   >   
   > The other possibility for media complicity is they might have gone along   
   > as a favor to their FBI minders because it fit their shared agenda to   
   > defeat Trump and elect Biden.   
   >   
   > After all, they were teammates in a similar effort in 2016, the Russia   
   > hoax to try to elect Hillary Clinton. That one failed and they were   
   > determined to succeed this time. So better not look too closely at Biden.   
   >   
   > Whatever the reason, we can say with absolute certainty the unholy   
   > collusion has three legs: the government, Big Tech and Big Media.   
   >   
   > Another unresolved piece of that alliance is the cabal of 51 former   
   > intelligence officers who signed a letter saying the laptop had “all the   
   > earmarks” of Russian disinformation. None had seen the laptop, but their   
   > letter became the story the media seized on and offered Joe Biden a   
   > lifeline in his next debate with Trump. Some signers still defend the   
   > letter, and not one has apologized for misleading the public.   
   >   
   > This is hardly a matter fit only for historians, especially not when most   
   > of the media covered Musk’s release the same way they covered the initial   
   > laptop story. They ignored it.   
   >   
   > That seems odd, until you consider they might have feared their role in   
   > suppressing the original story would be outed by the documents. I would   
   > call it a guilty conscience if these Dem handmaidens actually had a   
   > conscience, but that went overboard with all their standards the minute   
   > Trump came down the escalator.   
   >   
   > To make matters infinitely worse, the concentrated power of this collusion   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)