“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t."

[Darfius]

https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/...formation-dhs/

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.

[seer]

https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/...formation-dhs/

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.

How isn't this a violation of the First Amendment?

The Department of Homeland Security is quietly broadening its efforts to curb speech it considers dangerous, an investigation by The Intercept has found. Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents — obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, as well as public documents — illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms.

[Mountain Man]

How isn't this a violation of the First Amendment?

I can only assume they think it's legal because the Constitution explicitly prohibits Congress from enacting laws that suppress free speech, although that reasoning would never stand up in court. Either that, or they simply don't care that they are violating the Constitution.

[Ronson]

https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/...formation-dhs/

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.

If I owned Twitter, I would move my headquarters and servers to Liechtenstein.

[seer]

Either that, or they simply don't care that they are violating the Constitution.

Bingo!

[seanD]

How isn't this a violation of the First Amendment?

That's what Eric Schmitt's lawsuit is seeking to address...

In May, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt took the lead in filing a lawsuit to combat what he views as sweeping efforts by the Biden administration to pressure social media companies to moderate certain forms of content appearing on their platforms.

And this was the response from Satan...

Attorneys for the Biden administration have responded in court by claiming that the plaintiffs lack standing and that social media firms pursued content moderation policies on their own volition, without any “coercive” influence from the government.

No coercive influence, yeah right.

Worse case is that they use either veiled or direct threats (which is what I believe). Best case is they use the nebulous "We need you to help us fight terrorists" to get them comply.

[seanD]

https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/...formation-dhs/

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.

It was inevitable. I would even bet this has been going on a whole longer than we think it has.

This also seems to confirm my prior belief that Zucker was in fact actually downplaying FBI's involvement in smothering the Hunter laptop story on FB...

There is also a formalized process for government officials to directly flag content on Facebook or Instagram and request that it be throttled or suppressed through a special Facebook portal that requires a government or law enforcement email to use. At the time of writing, the “content request system” at facebook.com/xtakedowns/login is still live. DHS and Meta, the parent company of Facebook, did not respond to a request for comment. The FBI declined to comment.

My only question is how are they going (or what pressure tactics will they use) to enforce the scope of this, particularly against conservative platforms that refuse to cooperate?

[Mountain Man]

That's what Eric Schmitt's lawsuit is seeking to address...




And this was the response from Satan...



No coercive influence, yeah right.

Worse case is that they use either veiled or direct threats (which is what I believe). Best case is they use the nebulous "We need you to help us fight terrorists" to get them comply.

I doubt it was difficult to get Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon, and other online giants to play along, so it's likely true there was no coercion involved, but there was almost certainly collusion.

[Mountain Man]

In depth analysis of just how deep this rabbit hole goes:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...-surveillance/

[seanD]

I doubt it was difficult to get Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon, and other online giants to play along, so it's likely true there was no coercion involved, but there was almost certainly collusion.

I agree depending on how political the subject was, but this seems to suggest there was clear coercion at least in some cases...

Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.

I'm really curious how all this is going to play out with Elon's twitter purchase. I hope we're not being played and that this is perhaps a hint of good things to come...

In June, the same DHS advisory committee of CISA — which includes Twitter head of legal policy, trust, and safety Vijaya Gadde and University of Washington professor Kate Starbird — drafted a report to the CISA director calling for an expansive role for the agency in shaping the “information ecosystem.” The report called on the agency to closely monitor “social media platforms of all sizes, mainstream media, cable news, hyper partisan media, talk radio and other online resources.” They argued that the agency needed to take steps to halt the “spread of false and misleading information,” with a focus on information that undermines “key democratic institutions, such as the courts, or by other sectors such as the financial system, or public health measures.”

(...)

Last Thursday, immediately following billionaire Elon Musk’s completed acquisition of Twitter, Gadde was terminated from the company.

Though I'm still a bit skeptical, my fingers are crossed (I still can't tell what Elon's angle is -- is he legit or part of one of greatest hoaxes and globalist pied pipers we've ever seen).

[Ronson]

I doubt it was difficult to get Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon, and other online giants to play along, so it's likely true there was no coercion involved, but there was almost certainly collusion.

Fascism

[Mountain Man]

Though I'm still a bit skeptical, my fingers are crossed (I still can't tell what Elon's angle is -- is he legit or part of one of greatest hoaxes and globalist pied pipers we've ever seen).

I'm trying think of a time when an ultra rich person had a sincere desire to make people's lives better, and actually delivered, and I can't think of anything. Unfortunately, most of the time, it's about the ultra rich trying to shove their ideologies down our throats.

[seanD]

I'm trying think of a time when an ultra rich person had a sincere desire to make people's lives better, and actually delivered, and I can't think of anything. Unfortunately, most of the time, it's about the ultra rich trying to shove their ideologies down our throats.

A billionaire that not only shares a lot of the same transhuminist ideas WEF globalists share, but that has connections to the US defense department.