Censoring speech is now okay, according to the FEC. By acting as an extension of the Democrat Party and the political establishment, Twitter is a public-private partnership in good standing with the government oversight agency tasked with protecting the US population from propaganda.
FEC stated that Twitter did not violate any laws by censoring the NY Post and protecting the Biden family from legal scrutiny during the vital stretch of the 2020 Presidential election. When Twitter decided to spike the story as publishers and newspapers do about the explicit content and incriminating evidence on the Hunter Biden laptop, they just made a boo-boo. Jack said he was sorry so that we could move on.
Remember how a Delaware shop owned by John Paul Mac Isaac had obtained the MacBook pro? He was paid to fix it by Hunter, but the kid forgot about it. A pretty nice piece of hardware with confidential and incriminating evidence on it was not worth his time. Jet setting around the world and Arkansas must be a demanding schedule to keep.
Of course, once former New York Mayor and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani got his hands on the device and sent it to the FBI, you might expect legal consequences for the scion of Wilmington. But you would be wrong. The FBI subpoenaed the laptop and hard drive. Hunter Biden was supposedly the subject of a money-laundering investigation, and the emails on the device were verified, but then nothing happened.
Like Twitter putting the kibosh on a NY Post story, the FBI was not interested in prosecuting Hunter Biden. It would not look good. For whom?
As of this week, the Federal Election Committee presumed that Twitter did not mean to disregard the first amendment when it edited the New York Post’s stunning report on Hunter. According to the six-member panel, it is acceptable to prevent the New York Post from using Twitter for two weeks in October 2020 when they were one of the few new outlets providing an alternative narrative to the Democrat liberal media.
FEC commissioners must read minds because they determined that business, not politics, led to Twitter’s decision to squash the report on Hunter Biden’s misdeeds. Maybe they mean that Twitter knows that the Democrat Party is more likely to make Jack Dorsey’s life miserable if he did not help them out. But that sounds like extortion.
In October, the Republican National Committee objected to the FEC, suggesting that Twitter’s actions were an in-kind donation to Joe Biden. After thinking about this accusation for almost one year, the FEC decided no. It is now acceptable for news outlets to slant their coverage and editorial decisions to help the liberals take elections. Well, at least we now have that cleared up.
FEC reported that Twitter did not work with Biden because they did not find any evidence of coordination or communication between representatives of either the campaign or the company. Where is the NSA when you need them?
The FEC reports additionally absolved Twitter from efforts to protect Hunter Biden from links to Ukrainian organized crime when he joined Burisma in April 2014 for political influence and spending money. Messages acquired on Hunter’s laptop showed how Joe Biden, who was Barack Obama’s VP, used his position to shake down the Ukrainian energy firm Burisma Holdings. One must wonder what benefits were spread around the Obama administration because presumably Joe and Hunter did not keep all the money?
Not to worry, the FEC is all over the Section 230 stipulations for content providers. Rest assured that your government knows what you should know and think.