election, making the revelations in a lengthy twitter threat friday, saying that these were routinely removed at the request of both political parties, saying that democrats had more clout on that front due to the political leanings of staff. he also revealed internal communications that showed twitter justified the decision to suppress steve laptop story using its impact policy, but he says the reasoning is flawed. these policies normally require an official law enforcement of a hack, but no such finding appears and what one executive describes as a whirlwind 24-hour company-wide mess. according to them, it let the social media left front to take surprising action. twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and suppressing stories that it might be unsafe. they also blocked transmission through for extreme cases,
is what the comments are for on twitter. if someone disagrees with the te what s the new york post found, they can weigh in with the back and forth. that is what twitter is supposed to be. it made me think about the 2000 election. there was an early story that george w. bush had gotten a dwi in maine in 1976. it came out through a regional outlet, then fox decided this is a story, it s going to go out, fox reported it and other places picked it up. it was a story that could have affected people s thinkings right before the election, but it was because this is, at its base, a journalist organization. we cannot avoid that story. we put that out. twitter, what are you? are you a town square? if you are, you have to say if
stretching policy. elon musk is reinventing the game, saying that they will be radically transparent. a challenge the rest of you to keep up. we have not gotten answers on the fbi story. what s going on with the fbi? that piece of the puzzle was not revealed with what we got over the weekend. that s the central issue we ve got to figure out, because they were tipping twitter off to specifics in this story, including hunter biden. that means something and we need to know more. emily: to martha, as miranda devine was reporting, the fbi reported twitter to potential political operatives hacking and releasing content citing the hunter biden scenario, but was it twitter that ran with it and led to that twisted mentality with any request they would honor at that moment: must be this, must be this, and it begs the question:
choice. to your point about journalism and letting the story get out there, we ve not seen the mainstream media cover the story. the wall street journal said at the time we examined those messages. kimberley strassel at the wall street journals spoke with tony about belinsky before the record spoke with them before the election. they put it out on the town square. the other thing that i think will be interesting, twitter was a publicly traded company at the time that this happened. what happens to the shareholders? a lot of them lost money, rightly so in that elon musk take over. is it right for a corporation, publicly traded corporation, to be in a box saying here s a loser and a winner? democrats win, republicans lose. that s what the staff was doing. elon musk said it s a san francisco company.
e.g. child pornography. during this human day session, musk was asked directly about the t put her accusations paid > if twitter is doing 1 teams bidding before an election if twitter is doing one teams bidding before a pivotal election, that is the very definition of election interference, of course. emily: and yet, brian, the attack seems to be squarely faced on the messenger instead of the explosive revelation. this was a fascinating weekend, let s be clear: if you are a journalist, you should love this. journalists around the country said a nothing burger kind of story. but if you look at what they found, it was a twitter that looks like ftx. everybody was making it up as they went, inventing policy,