5 ms·

When people become a sworn officer of the FBI or any other federal LEO officer, they take an oath to protect and defend the US Constitution. When instead of up

When people become a sworn officer of the FBI or any other federal LEO officer, they take an oath to protect and defend the US Constitution. When instead of upholding the Constitution, they ask a private company to violate people's first ammendment rights, that is an abuse of power. It may be within Twitters terms of service to ban people and censor people, and that may be fine for Twitter, but for a sworn officer to use Twitter to censor people - that is an abuse of power. Of course, the files also show that Twitter personnel acted in bad faith and didn't follow their own ToS.

sleepybrett 4y ago
At no point did the FBI order that tweets be taken down.
- kodyo 4y ago
- oceanplexian 4y ago
  Yeah, so it seems looking at the emails, which is the only piece of information we are allowed to see. However if you think about it for a minute, if the FBI were this bold in written, subpoena-able communication, what do you think the offline conversations looked like?
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    If they had better they would definitely be showing it. So this is what there is.
  - djur 4y ago
    "The evidence doesn't show malfeasance, but if you imagine other evidence that does show malfeasance, that would be bad" is not a compelling argument in any situation.
roflyear 4y ago
Not a violation of free speech to tell Twitter to take down illegal content.
- tomohawk 4y ago
  What was illegal about the NYPost breaking a story about content found on Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop? If you have allegations of illegality, who determined that? Are you saying FBI should just say "Trust us, it's illegal - we don't need a jury or a judge"? Since when does the FBI just get to accuse people of things and take their rights away?
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    > What was illegal about the NYPost breaking a story about content found on Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop? Who said it was illegal? The FBI? Twitter? Can you highlight a quote here? Look at the sort of wording used in the examples in the thread. https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1603857573219819529 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1603857573219819529 - "notifying you of the below accounts which may potentially constitute violations of Twitter's Terms of Service"
    - kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y ago
      They were replying to a comment that the FBI asked twitter to remove illegal content. So to answer your question, the parent post said it was illegal.
      - nickthegreek 4y ago
        Did the fbi ask Twitter to ban the by post story? I haven’t seen that evidence.
    - lp0_on_fire 4y ago
      That sort of wording makes it worse, IMO. It's one thing for the FBI to contact twitter to say "hey there's this account that's posting instructions on how to make and plant pipe bombs so you should remove it" but a completely different thing for the FBI to say "hey there's thing thing that violates one your arbitrary terms of service so you should take it down". Why is the FBI spending time and resources looking for TOS violations for a private company? Why is the FBI spending time looking into _anything_ that's not illegal, period?
jasonhansel 4y ago
People don't have a constitutional right to post on Twitter.
calimac 4y ago

sleepybrett 4y ago

At no point did the FBI order that tweets be taken down.

kodyo 4y ago
oceanplexian 4y ago
Yeah, so it seems looking at the emails, which is the only piece of information we are allowed to see. However if you think about it for a minute, if the FBI were this bold in written, subpoena-able communication, what do you think the offline conversations looked like?
- jacquesm 4y ago
  If they had better they would definitely be showing it. So this is what there is.
- djur 4y ago
  "The evidence doesn't show malfeasance, but if you imagine other evidence that does show malfeasance, that would be bad" is not a compelling argument in any situation.

roflyear 4y ago

Not a violation of free speech to tell Twitter to take down illegal content.

tomohawk 4y ago
What was illegal about the NYPost breaking a story about content found on Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop? If you have allegations of illegality, who determined that? Are you saying FBI should just say "Trust us, it's illegal - we don't need a jury or a judge"? Since when does the FBI just get to accuse people of things and take their rights away?
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > What was illegal about the NYPost breaking a story about content found on Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop? Who said it was illegal? The FBI? Twitter? Can you highlight a quote here? Look at the sort of wording used in the examples in the thread. https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1603857573219819529 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1603857573219819529 - "notifying you of the below accounts which may potentially constitute violations of Twitter's Terms of Service"
  - kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y ago
    They were replying to a comment that the FBI asked twitter to remove illegal content. So to answer your question, the parent post said it was illegal.
    - nickthegreek 4y ago
      Did the fbi ask Twitter to ban the by post story? I haven’t seen that evidence.
  - lp0_on_fire 4y ago
    That sort of wording makes it worse, IMO. It's one thing for the FBI to contact twitter to say "hey there's this account that's posting instructions on how to make and plant pipe bombs so you should remove it" but a completely different thing for the FBI to say "hey there's thing thing that violates one your arbitrary terms of service so you should take it down". Why is the FBI spending time and resources looking for TOS violations for a private company? Why is the FBI spending time looking into _anything_ that's not illegal, period?

jasonhansel 4y ago

People don't have a constitutional right to post on Twitter.

calimac 4y ago