Twitter is full of kinky fetish porn that would get you banned on HN for linking.

Censoring skittle dick (a descriptive term, not a slur) 20 days out from an election was a crime.

We entertained how many years of Russia-collusion over the kremlin buying half a million in Facebook ads.

Meanwhile the phone call was coming from inside the house, and a home-grown “tech” company has done more harm to our democracy than any adversary.

Prison is the only acceptable conclusion for vijaya and her accomplices

> Censoring skittle dick (a descriptive term, not a slur) 20 days out from an election was a crime.

Nudity was posted non-consensually, which is a crime in California. It was removed. That is not a crime.

It was actually consensual legally, given the paper her signed deferring ownership of all contents upon forfeiture to the computer repair company.

That said, stop prenteding. They 1984 style erased it. They didn’t demand that you censor Hunter’s surgically enhanced implant dick, they erased the idea that it happed at all.

> It was actually consensual legally, given the paper her signed deferring ownership of all contents upon forfeiture to the computer repair company.

C'mon. Don't pretend like that's legally ironclad in the face of California's revenge porn law, it very obviously isn't and you're doing your case a total disservice here.

Californias censorship law itself is unconstitutional, but that doesn’t mean Twitter had to take it down globally. They could have only taken it down in CA.

But we all know that’s not why they did what they did, they conspired against the people of the United States.

They did this under the order and direction of United States Government employees

> They did this under the order and direction of United States Government employees

Truly incredible the way in which people see whatever they want to see in this story. From Taibbi himself:

“there’s no evidence - that I've seen - of any government involvement in the laptop story”

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598833927405215744

Irrelevant, we have Zuckerberg himself admitting to being “primed” by FBI for the hunter Biden story.

We have members of the Biden campaign linking tweets and high level Twitter officers replying “handled” (read in your favorite Italian accent).

Criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States.

>Irrelevant, we have Zuckerberg himself admitting to being “primed” by FBI for the hunter Biden story.

Please stop spreading misinformation. FBI gave only a broad warning: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fbi-responds-...

Zuckerberg didn't actually say that FBI ordered him to do anything. Facebook silenced the story on their own. He mentioned FBI to confuse people and make himself look good.

>We have members of the Biden campaign linking tweets and high level Twitter officers replying “handled” (read in your favorite Italian accent).

Twitter censoring the Hunter Biden story (the NYPost article) was unacceptable. But I really don't see anything wrong with reporting tweets containing revenge pornography, which 1) violates Twitter ToS 2) is illegal in California.

Sorry, are you calling California's anti-revenge porn laws unconstitutional censorship?

So if Fox News doesn’t cover Jared Kushner’s antics to your satisfaction, should all Fox News executives go to jail?

Non sequitur

You don’t know what that means.

“It does not follow”

You might not be wrong, but your post has no relevance

I see. So how a media company handles bias has no relevance to how a social media company can handle bias. They’re completely different and social media company executives get jail time.

Great points. Well reasoned.

The topic of discussion here is Twitter, the FBI, and the Biden campaign’s criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States.

How “Fox News handled desantis” is not relevant. Though you are welcome to start another topic.

Downplaying this topic as “what about X” is transparent

You’re the one howling for jail time for Twitter executives. I’m applying your logic to comparable situations to demonstrate its absurdity and help you stop hyperventilating.

Whataboutism is used to excuse bad behavior. Are you implying that Fox News bias is also illegal? Because I’m not. Media companies can be biased. They can favor candidates. Twitter isn’t on an ivory pedestal. Screaming jail time shows your ignorance to our legal system.

Twitter is used by sex workers all the time for pornographic images. What specifically about them violates the rules? Is it the fact that the person did not intend on those images being released? Do they have a claim if those images were no longer their property given the terms of service of the repair shop where the laptop was abandoned?

>California legislators passed a revenge porn law making it a crime for anyone to post online photos or videos of someone's intimate body parts without consent. The revenge porn law is defined under California Penal Code 647(J)(4) and often considered a type of nonconsensual pornography.

https://www.cronisraelsandstark.com/revenge-porn-california-...

Twitter HQ is in California.

>Is it the fact that the person did not intend on those images being released? Do they have a claim if those images were no longer their property given the terms of service of the repair shop where the laptop was abandoned?

I can understand the repair shop owning the hardware and being able to wipe the data and resell it. But do those terms also give the repair shop the right to login to bank accounts via saved passwords and transfer money? Or use the SSNs to apply for loans? Where is the line drawn?

If your company HR's data including your SSN and bank account numbers were on a laptop they abandoned at a repair shop, does the repair shop get to post them on their website?

From the site you linked to:

“... then they distribute the images knowing they will cause serious emotional distress, is guilty of revenge porn.”

Posting these pictures of Hunter was not done with the intent of causing emotional distress (and even if they did, Hunter wouldn't even care, he's too busy brushing his nose).

The images need to be labeled as adult, but for the bigger issue I think it’s easier to think of it as revenge porn.

Twitter's policy against "revenge porn" was likely the controlling factor. Also, in general, posting private photos of someone, without their consent, is disallowed on most/all platforms.

Sex workers agree to posting these pictures (at least we hope they do).

Are you arguing that it would be ok to post intimate pictures of you or someone in your family, or anybody, basically, without them explicitly agreeing to?

Are you seriously saying that a repair shop could take your personal data and publish it online as they wished because they just got access to your laptop (however they got it)?

In what world does a laptop repair shop has terms of services that would explicitly allow that?

No, they removed a NY Post story on the laptop and censored the story. Yes, the laptop contained pornographic images, and some have alleged it contains child pornography as well (with Hunter in the scene), but those images themselves did not appear in the NYPost article.

> they removed a NY Post story

They = Twitter in this instance, not the Biden team. Taibbi jumps from one event to the other as if to draw a line between them but there is an important distinction. None of the evidence presented shows the Biden team asking Twitter to take down the NY Post story, just the pornographic images posted.

Twitter censored everything to do with the Hunter Biden laptop story, they also took the extreme position of locking the NY Post account down over the article.

Matt Taibbi is showing requests to remove tweets related to the Biden laptop story from the Biden team and from the DNC, and showing Twitter rubber stamping those requests. No pushback. No review. Just "handled". It wasn't just pornographic images. It was buried as much as possible and flagged as disinformation across the platform.

https://www.businessinsider.com/jack-dorsey-ny-post-remains-...

> Matt Taibbi is showing requests to remove tweets related to the Biden laptop story from the Biden team and from the DNC, and showing Twitter rubber stamping those requests. No pushback. No review. Just "handled". It wasn't just pornographic images.

But that's exactly it: by the evidence presented it was just the pornographic images. Taibbi insinuates that Biden's team also requested other tweets be removed but there's no presented evidence to prove that.

They exercised their free speech rights on their platform.

> some have alleged it contains child pornography as well (with Hunter in the scene)

This is a tremendously incendiary and defamatory claim to make on the basis of "some have alleged". Unless you're willing to name your sources you should not post claims like this.