Axios has an interesting article today [SEE HERE] about the success of Bari Weiss and her wife Nellie Bowles website launch on the back of the Twitter Files release.

Axios – Bari Weiss, the New York Times columnist turned independent newsletter writer, has hired ten full-time employees and over a dozen contractors to help build her new media company, The Free Press, Weiss told Axios in an interview.

[…] Weiss launched The Free Press last Thursday, four days ahead of schedule, to capitalize on the media coverage around her “Twitter Files” reporting.

In less than a week, The Free Press has accrued more than 105,000 followers on Twitter and its flagship newsletter has added an additional 25,000 free and paid subscribers.

Weiss’ Twitter following itself has exploded in that time, growing from more than 500,000 followers to more than 900,000 in less than a week.

Last year, Marketwatch reported that Weiss made over $800,000 from her newsletter alone, which at the time had 14,000 paid subscribers. The newsletter has more than double that number of paid subscribers today.

(more…)

Former House Intelligence Committee lead investigator Kash Patel appeared on Steve Bannon’s podcast to discuss the Twitter Files. {Direct Rumble Link} Within the interview Mr. Patel asks the obvious question: Why are we not seeing the document trail where the FBI is making contact with Twitter?

The contacts are noted within the Twitter File release, but the specific methods, people and documents or email requests from the U.S. government into Twitter are not being released. Kash Patel asks Elon Musk to release these documents and asks why are we not seeing them? WATCH:

.

Patel’s point is well taken because insofar as the U.S. government contacts around the 2020 election would be important, the volume of contact and documents surrounding the COVID-19 control issues will be exponentially more intense and larger.

Release the government 2020 election contact information now, and then do the same thing when Twitter releases the substantive files about censorship related to COVID-19 and the vaccines.   Let the American people see who, what and how this DHS-Twitter ‘trusted partnership‘ portal was exploited.

(more…)

I’m not going to write extensively about this because I respect your intellectual ability to see the obvious.  Questions have been raised about why the Twitter File releases appear to have been structured in a fashion to protect government interests.

Well, the new Bari Weiss website that was set up to launch as an exclusive outcome of the Twitter File release, includes a current contributor and former 2020 control officer of the DOJ who would have facilitated the DHS/FBI contact with social media; the stuff that is transparently missing from the Twitter File releases.

[ SOURCE ]

Yes, former AG Bill Barr is a content partner with Twitter File narrative engineer Bari Weiss.  Gee, I wonder how that happens?

Oh look, and what a coincidence… they are both promoting Ron DeSantis.

Wait… Elon Musk is also promoting Ron Desantis… and Mr Musk is simultaneously promoting the Bari Weiss website that promotes Ron DeSantis… and contains Twitter File releases that are conspicuously missing the discussion angle of FBI influence in the 2020 election… Almost as if… wait, nah, that would be conspiracy talk.  Just ordinary coincidences everywhere, for sure.

(more…)

Former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, appeared on Sunday with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the Twitter file release that pertained to his former office and the contact between DNI election official Shelby Pierson and Twitter executive Noel Roth. {Direct Rumble Link}

DNI Ratcliffe does not use Shelby Pierson’s name within his comments, but refutes her action as described within the release by Matt Taibbi.  WATCH:

.

Within the Twitter file release, you will find Twitter’s lead censor, Yoel Roth, meeting with an official from the U.S. Dept of National Intelligence (DNI).  From the testimony of FBI Special Agent Elvis Chan, we know that official was Shelby Pierson.  Chan was speaking under oath in an ongoing first amendment lawsuit against the Biden administration for manipulating and censoring speech on social media.

(more…)

The fourth installment of the Twitter Files release dropped yesterday evening as presented by Michael Shellenberger [SEE HERE].  Overall, the Shellenberger angle covers the conversation within Twitter to block the communication and information from President Donald Trump.

Essentially, the executive filtration team in control of Twitter content was looking for ways to stop Donald Trump from using the platform and they modified all existing rules and moderation guidelines to target and censor President Trump.

[Read Twitter File Release #4 HERE]

One of the ways they justified their action was to infer motive for any content that President Trump provided through his Twitter account. “Ultimately on January 8, 2021, Twitter says its ban is based on “specifically how [Trump’s tweets] are being received & interpreted.””  The Twitter executives decided to reach their end goal of shutting down Trump’s voice, the way his message could be interpreted was their best justification.

Twitter File #4 walks through the internal conversation at Twitter in early January 2021, but again heavily redacts the specifics of who was participating in many of the conversations.  Also missing is any contact by government officials or representatives of the Biden team as the transition period was ongoing.  Given the nature of the previous contacts from the Biden campaign, the absence of communication from the transition period in Twitter File #4 release is stark.

Three other interesting Twitter developments below.

(more…)

… Both were targets of the U.S. government’s use of Twitter and social media to manipulate election outcomes.

While current conservative headlines are filled with discussion surrounding revelations of Twitter being used by U.S. government officials to control and manipulate public opinion, it is worthwhile reminding everyone how this process was first triggered – and then look at how the intelligence community applied the lessons to the USA in 2020.

The Obama administration first created the public-private partnership with Twitter and Facebook to support the “Arab Spring” uprising.   As a consequence, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was the first elected official to be taken out by former President Obama’s deployment of Twitter as a community activist tool for revolution in 2011. In direct and consequential ways, Egypt was the BETA test for a process that surface a decade later in the United States during the 2020 election.

Using and influencing social media was a tool created by the Obama state department, as noted years ago in Mic.Com:

[…] In countries like Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen, rising action plans such as protests made up of thousands, have been organized through social media such Facebook and Twitter. “We use Facebook to schedule the protests” an Arab Spring activist from Egypt announced “and [we use] Twitter to coordinate, and YouTube to tell the world.” The role that technology has taken in allowing the distribution of public information such as the kinds stated by the aforementioned activist, had been essential in establishing the democratic movement that has helped guide abused civilians to overthrow their oppressor. (link)

(NationalPulse) The most popular Twitter hashtags in the Arab region in the first three months of this year were “Egypt”, “Jan25”, “Libya”, “Bahrain” and “protest”.

Nearly 9 in 10 Egyptians and Tunisians surveyed in March said they were using Facebook to organise protests or spread awareness about them. All but one of the protests called for on Facebook ended up coming to life on the streets.

These and other findings from the newly released second edition of the Arab Social Media Report by the Dubai School of Government give empirical heft to the conventional wisdom that Facebook and Twitter abetted if not enabled the historic region-wide uprisings of early 2011. (link)

Fast forward to 2020, and those same elements deployed against the Egyptian government were deployed in the United States in a coordinated public-private partnership with Twitter, Facebook and social media.

The U.S. government control over these social media platforms is ultimately what lies at the heart of the latest Twitter Files release.

(more…)

Twitter File Release #3 come from Matt Taibbi – SEE HERE – and includes a review of some internal documents and internal communication in the lead up to the 2020 election.

As noted by Taibbi, “as the election approached, senior executives – perhaps under pressure from federal agencies, with whom they met more as time progressed – increasingly struggled with rules and began to speak of “vios” as pretexts to do what they’d likely have done anyway.”

“Vios” is a short-hand term for violations.

Internal Slacks, communication chats within the organization, show Twitter executives discussing various relationships with federal agencies, specifically the Dept of Homeland Security (DHS), various elements of the FBI and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNI.  Twitter’s main censor Yoel Roth plays a key role in the discussion.  Mr. Roth organized many of the communication chats that surrounded the election.

The slacks (communication chats) contain channels to create sub-sets of topics with smaller groups of internal officers assembled to prioritize the discussion.

The reports being cited by Taibbi are, “based on searches for docs linked to prominent executives, whose names are already public. They include Roth, former trust and policy chief Vijaya Gadde, and recently plank-walked Deputy General Counsel (and former top FBI lawyer) Jim Baker.” … “On October 8th, 2020, executives opened a channel called “us2020_xfn_enforcement.” Through J6, this would be home for discussions about election-related removals, especially ones that involved “high-profile” accounts (often called “VITs” or “Very Important Tweeters”).”

There was internal discussion about how they should describe their contact with federal agencies who were involved in the process of filtering the public discussion.  Essentially, what were these Twitter executives going to say about how they are coordinating with DHS, FBI and ODNI?  Policy Director Nick Pickles, eventually led a discussion to label the government contacts in the generalized term “partnerships.”

(more…)

Thesis: Begin with The End in Mind – The U.S. Government control over social media though DHS was going to surface eventually.  The people who constructed the systems knew exposure would eventually come.  Two CENSORSHIP lawsuits, one filed by Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai in 2020 [LINK], and another filed by Missouri Attorney General in May 2022 [STATE OF MISSOURI ET AL VERSUS JOSEPH R BIDEN JR ET AL], were going to push the relationship between DHS and social media into the public consciousness; mitigation efforts would be needed.

The timing of the Twitter purchase by Elon Musk, initially triggered via major stock purchase in April 2022, must be considered with the overlay of these two sunlight lawsuits.  Regardless of who owned Twitter, the nature of DHS controlling a backdoor portal into the content of social media was going to surface – as it has been unfolding from the two referenced censorship lawsuits.

The Twitter Files represent a gateway of discovery into how government assisted creating “Oligarchical Systems.” Surveillance systems delivering mutual benefits called public-private partnerships were formed.  Readers here are months ahead of where the arc of this story is destined.  However, oligarchical beneficiaries will always defend the system against rogue oligarchs who become a threat.

There are major inconsistencies in the public narrative as it swirls around Elon Musk and Twitter.

How could a businessman, an entrepreneur like Elon Musk, spend $44 billion, that’s BILLION, on an enterprise without knowing the basic outline of how that enterprise was operating.  In a world of financial due diligence, on a scale of this size, the contradictions do not make sense.

Yet if we are to take Elon Musk at his word, he had no idea that DHS operated a portal into the network. He also had no idea about James Baker working as Twitter legal counsel and carrying such a massive conflict of interest.  Additionally, via his announcement last night, Musk had no idea that Perkins Coie was legally representing Twitter.

How does an owner/operator take ownership of an organization and not know these senior executive issues?  Reconcile these questions, and we begin to reconcile a background of activity that Mr. Musk may not know about.  The alternative explanation is much more nefarious and involves Musk as a willing participant.

Regardless, before going further I cannot emphasize this point enough.   We cannot fight our way through these puzzling issues until we all approach the big questions from the same baseline, the root of what created the system.

(more…)

California Republican National Committee (RNC) Representative Harmeet Dhillon appears with Steve Bannon to give her expanded explanation of why she wants to become RNC chair and the reforms she views are needed within the national body. {Direct Rumble Link}

Mrs. Dhillon expresses a desire to remove the current divide that exists between RNC national members and the base voters within the states.  Reemphasizing the need for the populist voice to have representation in the Republican Party, Mrs. Dhillon outlines the need to shift priorities in order to align with the base voter. WATCH:

Steve Bannon is correct mid-interview when he says 95% of the donor apparatus to the RNC are globalist Wall Street billionaires and corporations who want the RNC aligned with their financial priorities.  That is a big issue and one not easily resolved.  As long as the RNC emphasizes the importance of money, the voice of the voting base will always be a secondary consideration.

The DNC wants power. The RNC wants money. The DNC uses money to get power. The RNC uses power to get money.  The ideology of the DNC drives their donor activity. The donor activity of the RNC drives their ideology.  This is the essential difference.

(more…)

Yesterday, we speculated publicly the first set of “Twitter Files” released was heavily pre-filtered by internal stakeholders connected to DHS who hold a vested interest in controlling any evidence of Twitter’s former political activity.

Knowing there are multiple executives remaining within the company who previously aligned with the intents of government, specifically DHS officials, to control the platform, the prediction was not a stretch. Indeed, it just made common sense.

Former FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker, a man of notoriously corrupt disposition, was one of those former government officials who started working for Twitter as general counsel.  James Baker (pictured below left) working as a government mechanism for filtration of damaging information was not a leap. Again, just common sense.

Today, as an outcome of internal discoveries that indeed Jim Baker did prefilter internal documents in order to mitigate sunlight and exposure [outline here], Twitter CEO Elon Musk fired legal counsel James Baker.

Mr Musk said through his Twitter account, “In light of concerns about Baker’s possible role in suppression of information important to the public dialogue, he was exited from Twitter today.”  Mr. Musk followed up a question about James Baker being asked to explain himself by saying, “His explanation was …unconvincing.”

Matt Taibbi provides the context:

Taibbi – On Friday, the first installment of the Twitter files was published here. We expected to publish more over the weekend. Many wondered why there was a delay.

We can now tell you part of the reason why. On Tuesday, Twitter Deputy General Counsel (and former FBI General Counsel) Jim Baker was fired. Among the reasons? Vetting the first batch of “Twitter Files” – without knowledge of new management.

(more…)