And yet it's treated as just the latest Twitter drama. Reactions like the ones I'm seeing--"Republicans are just obsessed with Hunter's ****!"--are the reason why the "I Support the Current Thing" NPC meme exists.

You don't have a 1st amendment right to post on twitter.

If twitter bans me for spamming, do you think I can sue them?

Twitter officers conspired with hostile, rogue actors inside the US government to defraud United States Citizens of their conditional rights

They abused technology designed to prevent the spread of child pornography to censor information harmful to their preferred political candidate at the behest of government officials.

It's not that Twitter stopped people from posting. It's that Twitter did that at the behest of the government. That is a clear violation of the First Amendment.

The government can ask private companies not to publish things, it does that for "national security" all the time. The company can tell them to pound sound - that's been well established. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/05/16/wh... for example. But there's nothing illegal (and most certainly not 30 year prison sentence illegal) about the government saying "hey could you review these tweets please"?

Do we know what they contained? Were they threats? Spam? Copyright infringing? Disagreements about tax policy?

It's called "soft power," and the use of "review" in those messages is clearly meaning something more than that. Otherwise, the government would not have suggested anything at all.

It’s clearly illegal, it’s conspiracy to defraud the United States.

United States citizens have explicit rights, and corporate employees colluding with government officials to “voluntarily” nullify those rights are guilty of conspiracy to defraud the United States

The government represents us, a collusion to defeat our rights is conspiracy against us and subject to civil and criminal action

> The government can ask

It actually can not.

The dude behind you with a pipe in his hand asks for your car keys in the parking lot.

Is that ok? He just asked is all…

Yes they can. Well established and not even controversial in legal circles.

Wait until everyone hears about ITAR restrictions...

> It's that Twitter did that at the behest of the government.

Could you describe the government at the time this action was taken? What relationship did the people asking Twitter to do things with the government? Did the people making the requests have any authority to direct any department of the Federal Government to take any action?

Rogue elements of the FBI colluded with private corporations and elements of the Democratic Party to defraud US citizens of their fundamental rights for the benefit of their preferred political candidate.

They committed conspiracy to defraud the United States, and will in due time be charged as such by the Department of Justice.

State employees who participated are traitors.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...

Now political campaigns are the government?

Would be curious on your take of what DeSantis was trying to do to Disney in FL? 30 years in prison for threatening Disney about its speech?

Not engaging in your whataboutism

What I will say, on topic, is that everyone who was employed by the government in these emails deserves prison time.

Most of the private individuals do too, but that’s less legally sound.

In one case, you literally have a government official threatening a private business. In the other, you have the campaign of a private citizen asking for a review. In the first you have actual threats of government power. In the latter, there isn’t even an implied threat.

Campaigns ask many private businesses and people for things they don’t receive.

Officials at the FBI, operating under color of law, mislead Meta/Facebook to believe that the hunter biden content was Russian misinformation prior to an election.

In parallel we have a “political campaign that totally isn’t colluding with the government” ordering some of the most powerful tech companies in the world to “review” content tony soprano style.

The most charitable take is that you are naive, the realistic take it that you are downplaying criminal acts by major entrenched political entities in the US

Zuckerberg said the FBI told Facebook they had intelligence there was going to be a Russian misinformation campaign right before the election. The FBI didn't tell them _this_ was that campaign, that was an assumption made by Facebook.

Tony just said that it would be nice if Pauli fell down the stairs after ratting. He never directly ordered the murder your honor.

Meanwhile we have direct evidence the FBI was aware of this content, had possession of it for over a year, and when they could no longer suppress the evidence conveniently “educated” (criminal conspiracy) their “partners”.

Also in context, Zuckerberg provided this explanation when directly questioned about HB. They only acted this way because the FBI instructed them to.

Criminal. Conspiracy. To defraud. The United States.

Now do J6. Will no one rid me of this meddlesome Pence?

I see. So now a demand for review by a campaign is actually the FBI.

And the FBI should not engage in countering foreign influence campaigns like the hacked emails in 2016. Foreign adversaries should have free reign to hack and release private data and the media should encourage and distribute it all without any caution.

Your reasoning skills are next level.

It’s worse than that, rogue members of FBI illegally acted under its law enforcement authority to collude with a presidential campaign to threaten a private entity to censor constitutionally protected speech.

As I previously stated, (lengthy) prison time is the best possible outcome for all involved.

Wow, you've really gotten yourself twisted up here haven't you. Good luck with your nothingburger.

DeSantis should be sentenced to Gitmo for the war crimes he committed there.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ron-desantiss-military...

>>The people involved should be facing 30 year prison sentences.

For what crime, specifically?

Conspiracy to defraud the United States.

That's...not a crime? The Justice Department can't just declare things as illegal and throw people in jails for 30 years.

It is absolutely a crime

> The general conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371, creates an offense "[i]f two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...

You are misreading that very severely. Even if it was a first amendment violation to ask twitter to review certain tweets.

"The intent required for a conspiracy to defraud the government is that the defendant possessed the intent (a) to defraud, (b) to make false statements or representations to the government or its agencies in order to obtain property of the government, or that the defendant performed acts or made statements that he/she knew to be false, fraudulent or deceitful to a government agency, which disrupted the functions of the agency or of the government."

What false statements/representations were made, by anyone?

In addition, they had to in some way "defraud the United States" which is: "They cheat the government out of money or property; They interfere or obstruct legitimate Government activity; or They make wrongful use of a governmental instrumentality." - None of which apply.

As an employee of the government there is the presumption that you are knowledgeable of your role, and that said role is charged with upholding the founding document of your organization.

For example, a teacher hired at a school cannot argue that they could not be expected to teach.

Much in the same way, a government employee cannot in good faith argue that they cannot be expected to uphold the constitution.

By secretly colluding with private companies (that the government has failed to regulate, I might add) to suppress otherwise constitutionally protected activity government employees are criminally liable

There's a really big (and important!) difference between doing something that's wrong and doing something that's criminal.

> All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes

Bigly constitutional