7 ms·

Oh, i definitely agree that as a private company Twitter is well within its rights to censor what it believes is "misinformation" but an important line has been

Oh, i definitely agree that as a private company Twitter is well within its rights to censor what it believes is "misinformation" but an important line has been crossed today by Twitter and Facebook. A story about potential corruption of a candidate for the US president has been censored by two of the largest information brokers in the world. Also interestingly, no denial from Joe Biden about the authenticity of these emails. Wouldnt that be the first thing you'd do if this wasnt true? lol

the_only_law 6y ago
> Also interestingly, no denial from Joe Biden about the authenticity of these emails. Wouldnt that be the first thing you'd do if this wasnt true? I assume most politicians at the presidential candidate level have some sort of PR team that works to come up with some official response to these sorts of controversies
- throwawa3495 6y ago
  "JOE BIDEN SPOKESMAN ANDREW BATES hits back at the N.Y. POST STORY, via NATASHA BERTRAND and KYLE CHENEY: “Investigations by the press, during impeachment, and even by two Republican-led Senate committees whose work was decried as ‘not legitimate’ and political by a GOP colleague have all reached the same conclusion: that Joe Biden carried out official U.S. policy toward Ukraine and engaged in no wrongdoing. Trump Administration officials have attested to these facts under oath. “The New York Post never asked the Biden campaign about the critical elements of this story. They certainly never raised that Rudy Giuliani - whose discredited conspiracy theories and alliance with figures connected to Russian intelligence have been widely reported - claimed to have such materials. Moreover, we have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.” idk, read for yourself https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2020/10/14/biden-blasts-back-at-nyp-490603 https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2020/10/14/...
  - the_only_law 6y ago
    I mean I don't particularly have much stake in whether its true or not, I'm just saying I'm not shocked he's not responding to it immediately for vaguely similar reasons to why people tell you not to talk to the police without a lawyer, whether you're innocent or not.
    - throwawa3495 6y ago
      that's a fair point, just if its not true its pretty easy to say "not true, fake news" instead, what the answer that's provided is "we checked the schedule and didn't see it there" which is kinda suspicious. Like the censorship of "misinformation" would be more persuasive then I think.
      - mcphage 6y ago
        > just if its not true its pretty easy to say "not true, fake news" instead, what the answer that's provided is "we checked the schedule and didn't see it there" which is kinda suspicious. Wait, so you're saying that providing an alibi as to why the claim is impossible is more suspicious than dismissing it as fake news without a defense? I'm not sure how else to interpret what you're saying, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but that position is mindboggling to me.
        throwawa3495 6y ago
        Just because it wasn't on Biden's "official" schedule, doesn't mean it didn't happen. My point is that saying "the meeting didnt happen" is less suspicious than saying "We checked the official schedule and find no record that the meeting happened" Bc, of course, light bribery probably does not go down when you're on the official schedule
        mcphage 6y ago
        “The meeting didn’t happen” isn’t what you said in your previous comment.
Barrin92 6y ago
>Wouldnt that be the first thing you'd do if this wasnt true? If i was Joe Biden and the yellow press came after me honestly I'd do exactly what Joe Biden does and ignore them rather than giving them oxygen. If people like Biden or Clinton responded every time someone tries to capitalise on some bullshit attached to their name they'd not be doing anything else
- throwawa3495 6y ago
  Biden put a "lid" on speaking directly to the press today. idk folks, i was born at night but it wasn't last night.
- spoopyskelly 6y ago
  Biden is ignoring them because he has no idea what's going on, not because of some grand strategies.
- Thorrez 6y ago
  > I'd do exactly what Joe Biden does and ignore them rather than giving them oxygen. Joe Biden ignored the reports? The article says Joe Biden responded, saying the meeting didn't take place: > In a Thursday afternoon statement, the Biden campaign said the paper “never asked . . . about the critical elements of this story,” and that a review of “Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time” show that “no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.” The Biden campaign did not dispute the veracity of the emails, though no other media outlet has confirmed the Post’s story so far.
  - aksss 6y ago
    That reply seems eerily similar to their response to Tara Reid’s allegations - “we have no official record of that in our boxes of records that we looked through” Yep.
    - Thorrez 6y ago
      Joe Biden's response doesn't say "the calendar says the meeting didn't happen". His response says "the meeting didn't happen".

the_only_law 6y ago

> Also interestingly, no denial from Joe Biden about the authenticity of these emails. Wouldnt that be the first thing you'd do if this wasnt true? I assume most politicians at the presidential candidate level have some sort of PR team that works to come up with some official response to these sorts of controversies

throwawa3495 6y ago
"JOE BIDEN SPOKESMAN ANDREW BATES hits back at the N.Y. POST STORY, via NATASHA BERTRAND and KYLE CHENEY: “Investigations by the press, during impeachment, and even by two Republican-led Senate committees whose work was decried as ‘not legitimate’ and political by a GOP colleague have all reached the same conclusion: that Joe Biden carried out official U.S. policy toward Ukraine and engaged in no wrongdoing. Trump Administration officials have attested to these facts under oath. “The New York Post never asked the Biden campaign about the critical elements of this story. They certainly never raised that Rudy Giuliani - whose discredited conspiracy theories and alliance with figures connected to Russian intelligence have been widely reported - claimed to have such materials. Moreover, we have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.” idk, read for yourself https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2020/10/14/biden-blasts-back-at-nyp-490603 https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2020/10/14/...
- the_only_law 6y ago
  I mean I don't particularly have much stake in whether its true or not, I'm just saying I'm not shocked he's not responding to it immediately for vaguely similar reasons to why people tell you not to talk to the police without a lawyer, whether you're innocent or not.
  - throwawa3495 6y ago
    that's a fair point, just if its not true its pretty easy to say "not true, fake news" instead, what the answer that's provided is "we checked the schedule and didn't see it there" which is kinda suspicious. Like the censorship of "misinformation" would be more persuasive then I think.
    - mcphage 6y ago
      > just if its not true its pretty easy to say "not true, fake news" instead, what the answer that's provided is "we checked the schedule and didn't see it there" which is kinda suspicious. Wait, so you're saying that providing an alibi as to why the claim is impossible is more suspicious than dismissing it as fake news without a defense? I'm not sure how else to interpret what you're saying, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but that position is mindboggling to me.
      - throwawa3495 6y ago
        Just because it wasn't on Biden's "official" schedule, doesn't mean it didn't happen. My point is that saying "the meeting didnt happen" is less suspicious than saying "We checked the official schedule and find no record that the meeting happened" Bc, of course, light bribery probably does not go down when you're on the official schedule
        mcphage 6y ago
        “The meeting didn’t happen” isn’t what you said in your previous comment.

Barrin92 6y ago

>Wouldnt that be the first thing you'd do if this wasnt true? If i was Joe Biden and the yellow press came after me honestly I'd do exactly what Joe Biden does and ignore them rather than giving them oxygen. If people like Biden or Clinton responded every time someone tries to capitalise on some bullshit attached to their name they'd not be doing anything else

throwawa3495 6y ago
Biden put a "lid" on speaking directly to the press today. idk folks, i was born at night but it wasn't last night.
spoopyskelly 6y ago
Biden is ignoring them because he has no idea what's going on, not because of some grand strategies.
Thorrez 6y ago
> I'd do exactly what Joe Biden does and ignore them rather than giving them oxygen. Joe Biden ignored the reports? The article says Joe Biden responded, saying the meeting didn't take place: > In a Thursday afternoon statement, the Biden campaign said the paper “never asked . . . about the critical elements of this story,” and that a review of “Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time” show that “no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.” The Biden campaign did not dispute the veracity of the emails, though no other media outlet has confirmed the Post’s story so far.
- aksss 6y ago
  That reply seems eerily similar to their response to Tara Reid’s allegations - “we have no official record of that in our boxes of records that we looked through” Yep.
  - Thorrez 6y ago
    Joe Biden's response doesn't say "the calendar says the meeting didn't happen". His response says "the meeting didn't happen".