Jack, who never had control, says just release everything without filter.
Elon says stuff might have been hidden from you too, and some stuff deleted:
Knowing the background of Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop…
Obvious question… Hey fellas, who was doing the hiding and deleting?
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.
Sooner or later someone, if not Donald Trump, is going to have to start a second party.
Appearing on CBS with Margaret Brennan, incoming House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner walks through the priorities of the new HPSCI committee, to include that President Trump is horrible, Ukraine President Zelenskyy is awesome, Joe Biden is doing an awesome job and Ukraine needs more U.S. money and weapons.
If you listen closely, you might even catch the part where Mike Turner says he is working swimmingly with current HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff and current Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner. Yes, folks, you just cannot make this stuff up. Ms. Brennan is absolutely smitten with Mr. Turner, he’s an acceptable republican. WATCH:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: And we turn now to Ohio Congressman Mike Turner, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee. Congressman Turner, good to have you here in person.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE TURNER: Thank you. Yes. It’s great to be here.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So just yesterday, the Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines said that Russia was perhaps struggling to keep up with the amount of munitions that it’s using in this war in Ukraine, the cold weather is slowing combat. The Secretary of State, though, didn’t really give hope for diplomacy at this moment. Given what you know, when will this war end?
REP. TURNER: Well, the one thing that we know is that the- the gains that Ukraine is making are real, they’re real in the battlefield. They’re real in the support that they have around the world, they have with democracies on the floor of the United Nations, in condemning this aggression by Russia. But Ukraine really has to be the one that decides that if, when, and how negotiations are entered into, and at this point, you know, they’re battling for their country. They’re losing lives for democracy. President Zelenskyy says, I was just in Ukraine, just before the elections, he says openly, he understands that he’s the frontlines for democracy, and he’s fighting an authoritarian regime. And I think, you know, obviously, Russia has to reevaluate how they look at this conflict and how Putin looks at what he has started–
It is very well known by now that FBI agents worked within social media networks like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram through direct portals connecting the government to the backdoors of the networks. The Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) continue to operate in partnership with various tech systems and platforms to monitor content.
During a deposition this week the FBI admitted to giving instructions to tech companies like Google, Apple and Microsoft to block URLs without a basis in legality. Essentially the ideology of the FBI and DHS determines the targets of the content removal, blockage and/or censoring.
To repeat, these are not FBI and DHS instructions based on defined criminal activity, these are government instructions based on disagreements over ‘information’ as espoused by the content provider.
Information the government agrees with is safe; however, information the U.S. government doesn’t agree with is targeted. Obviously, a person of reasonable intelligence can see the problem with allowing law enforcement to determine which information is valid and which information is invalid.
(Fox News) – On Tuesday, lawyers from the offices of Attorneys General Eric Schmitt of Missouri and Jeff Landry of Louisiana deposed FBI Supervisory Special Agent Elvis Chan as part of their lawsuit against the Biden administration. That suit accuses high-ranking government officials of working with giant social media companies “under the guise of combating misinformation” to achieve greater censorship.
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals having previously ruled the special master cannot review classified documents, also ruled today against the special master having any involvement in the filtering of seized documents from Mar-a-Lago. [Ruling Here]
Previously, the lower court appointed a special master to review the seized documents and ensure no privileged material was exploited by the DOJ. However, the appellate court determined the DOJ can independently define a national security interest and classify documents with no legal basis for challenge, therefore the special master cannot filter classified documents.
Today the appeals court essentially said if the search warrant was legally predicated and legally valid, and if the search warrant was used legally, then all the seized documents are valid for the investigative purposes of the DOJ – regardless of their content. The only way to fight the authority of the DOJ seizure is to challenge the legality of the search warrant. However, here’s where things get weird.
President Trump’s lawyers have been: (1) blocked from receiving a non-redacted search warrant; (2) denied access to the underlying probable cause affidavit used to predicate the search warrant, and (3) denied the full contents of the documents that were seized as part of the warrant (they are not allowed to see). Yet somewhere in this convoluted mess, we are supposed to believe a 4th amendment violation doesn’t exist.
CTH has not visited the various Twitter stories recently, quite frankly because we are ambivalent to them. It just seems illogical for Elon Musk to have purchased Twitter without any idea of what was happening inside Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop, the public-private partnership that structures the operations of the social media company known as Twitter.
That said, some interesting developments recently as media rail against the platform and organized ultra-leftist groups demand advertising boycotts. Apparently, Apple and Android are threatening to remove the Twitter App and Mr. Musk is doubling down on exposing the matrix of how the U.S. government was working with Twitter toward controlling speech that was against their interests.
This tweet about releasing internal “files” on “speech suppression” follow on the heels of Mr. Musk noting that government involvement in the blocking of speech is very troubling.
In a recent court filing [Document Here] President Trump through his legal counsel has requested Judge Cannon to unredact and unseal the search warrant affidavit used as the predicate for the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago. Apparently, the DOJ have yet to provide President Trump with the constitutionally required predicate documents to support their search.
Additionally, the DOJ previously leaked to media about “empty folders with classified banners” as part of the evidence cache they collected. According to the filing the DOJ has since presented three different versions of their evidence collection list, with the most recent list dropping any claims of “two empty folders with classified banners.”
While asking the court to provide the affidavit to the defense team, the lawyers for President Trump are noting the fourth amendment protects everyone against warrantless searches and seizures, and that same protection also guarantees the target the right to receive and review the claimed justification for the warrant.
The unredacted affidavit is obligated to be supplied so that it can be determined if the search warrant was legally valid and predicated. General search warrants are not legally permitted. The warrant must specify what is being searched and why. The DOJ is fighting against this affidavit release. The Trump lawyers are asking the judge to make a decision.
If you read the article about the “Pegasus Project”, spyware created to infect cell phones that was marketed by Israeli intelligence through a company called NSO {Go Deep Here}, then you essentially know the background. Pegasus is “no click” targeting spyware that can be deployed against cellular phones, simply by inputting the phone number and transmitting to it.
The Guardian previously reported, “Claudio Guarnieri, who runs Amnesty International’s Security Lab, said once a phone was infected with Pegasus, a client of NSO could in effect take control of a phone, enabling them to extract a person’s messages, calls, photos and emails, secretly activate cameras or microphones, and read the contents of encrypted messaging apps such as WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal.”
Pegasus was deployed to target tens-of-thousands of cell phones by the people who Israel sold the spyware to. The Guardian, and a group of allied leftists in media, were previously granted access to a leaked batch of 50,000 phone numbers that the Pegasus software was operating in.
In a recent update from the New York Times they stated, “[it] has been used by police and intelligence services to hack the phones of drug kingpins and terrorists, but gained notoriety when it was revealed that governments, like Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Hungary and India, had deployed it against political dissidents, journalists and human rights workers.
It was also recently revealed the U.S. FBI under Director Chris Wray purchased the Pegasus program for “FBI experiments” and “exploration” into how the spyware program could be used domestically.
The FBI was initially reluctant to reveal their ownership of the Pegasus program, however, within FOIA documents related to the potential for domestic surveillance and concerns about fourth amendment constitutional protections, the FBI admitted they retain the capability – but promised it has not been deployed.
(New York Times) – […] The Times revealed in January that the F.B.I. had purchased Pegasus in 2018 and, over the next two years, tested the spyware at a secret facility in New Jersey. Since the bureau first purchased the tool, it has paid approximately $5 million to NSO.
Since that story was published, F.B.I. officials, including Mr. Wray, have gone further than they did during the closed meeting with senators last December. They acknowledged that the bureau did consider deploying Pegasus, though they still emphasized that the F.B.I.’s main goal was to test and evaluate it to assess how adversaries might use it. (read more)
Now, stay with me…
If you doubted the intent of the primary function of the appointment for Special Counsel John Smith, you can put that doubt to rest now. Appearing on CBS FtN Democrat Rep Zoe Lofgren confirms the intent of the Garland appointment is to receive evidence from the J6 Committee and utilize that evidence in the targeting operation against Republicans in congress.
Read the carefully worded statements from Lofgren and compare them to the background we previously outlined. Everything is clear. WATCH:
Primary goal, create enough of a legal mess as to obstruct any republican legislative effort against the Biden White House. Additionally, if Smith’s DC team can pick-off a few republican House members under charges of “supporting an insurrection“, the political power will revert back to the Democrats in office.
They didn’t just think this up overnight.
This is why the January 6 committee never ended. They are using J6 as a weapon against their losing the House to republicans. The Democrats are now structurally targeting Republicans with the appointment of Jack Smith. It’s actually a brilliant move. The executive is now investigating the legislative branch; the legal structure of this eliminates the separation of powers issue.
The DOJ is not investigating republicans, they are investigating defined criminals; insurrectionists that are national security threats, that happen to be republicans. See how that works?
DATA Links: (1) Merrick Garland DOJ Statement on Appointment of Special Counsel ~ (2) pdf of Legal Appointment ~ (3) Statement of John Smith upon Appointment ~ (4) Transcript of AG Merrick Garland Public Announcement.
The pretending is severe as CBS recruits former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to discuss the decision by Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel to investigate republicans in congress and President Donald Trump.
You can tell the pretending is severe because neither Rosenstein nor Brennan even touches on the primary aspect to the written instructions by Garland to special counsel John Smith. The primary function of the special counsel is completely avoided in the interview, [again, read the pdf of the appointment]. Instead, the conversation with Rosenstein focuses on the second, lesser included instruction, the Trump-centric portion.
The corporate media engineers, working on concert with the DC agenda, are pulling Rosenstein into the picture to frame the narrative toward an announcement of an indictment against President Trump. WATCH:
In response to the question of the appointment itself, Rosenstein noted he “probably would not” have made the decision to appoint a special counsel. However, don’t get too caught up in the granules of the interview itself. Instead, ask why the media is pulling Rosenstein into the prosecutorial debate? What benefit is there? Within those answers you then overlay the fact the primary function of the appointment itself is not part of the conversation. [Transcript Below]