White House Expert Scott Atlas Censored By Twitter

Social media company Twitter finished its week of apparently politically motivated censorship on its platform by banning tweets regarding the efficacy of masks from Scott Atlas, a member of the White House scientific team battling the coronavirus.

Atlas, a senior fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institute, not only had his tweets removed, he was banned from tweeting until he deleted the tweets that Twitter for unclear reasons objects to. Here are the tweets in question:

In an email to The Federalist, Atlas outlined the evidence behind his tweet.

In the deleted tweet, I cited the following evidence against general population masks:

1) Cases exploded even with mandates: Los Angeles County, Miami-Dade County, Hawaii, Alabama, the Philippines, Japan, the United Kingdom, Spain, France, Israel.

2)  Dr. Carl Heneghan, University of Oxford, director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and editor in chief of British Medical Journal Evidence-Based Medicine: ‘It would appear that despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks.’

(https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/)

3) The WHO:  ‘The widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider’  (http://bitly.ws/afUm)

4) The CDC: ‘Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.’ (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article).

I also cited an article giving detailed explanation of the reasons why masks might not prevent spread:  https://t.co/1hRFHsxe59

Notwithstanding this evidence regarding arguably the most important and contentious debate raging in American society — the constant mandate of masks — it appears some 20-something with his pronouns in his Twitter bio just pushed a button and erased scientifically accurate information. For some reason, which hopefully Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey can explain when he is dragged before the Senate, Atlas was silenced by the tech giant.

This comes the same week that Twitter blocked New York Post articles alleging improprieties involving presidential candidate Joe Biden, his son Hunter, and the Ukrainian energy company Burisma revealed by a laptop now held by the FBI. For good measure, Twitter also banned the New York Post’s official Twitter account from the platform.

Universal masking is a subject of scientific dispute, and just happens to be a contentious political argument in the midst of the 2020 presidential election. Under the dubious policy of stopping the spread of disinformation, Twitter has silenced an expert on the matter for what seems to be politically motivated purposes.

Twitter, which claims to be a neutral platform and enjoys legal protection as such, has once again proven that not only does it have an editorial agenda, it has a political one. You see, the information overlords at Twitter dot com will decide what information and what facts the masses like you and me are allowed to consume on their platform.

That would be fine if they were a publisher and treated as such legally, but for now they are not. Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act gives Twitter special protection to engage in censorship, but after this week of obviously politically motivated silencing, many in Congress are looking to stripping the company of that protection.

Twitter’s reasoning behind banning information that questions the efficacy of masks is as opaque as a smile behind one. Like much of the traditional media, it seems to believe that the American people are too stupid to confront and analyze actual information, and instead must be spoon-fed instructions like toddlers. You don’t have to know why you must cover your face everywhere you go, you just have to do it!

This is enough; it was well past enough already, frankly. Twitter is now censoring important and much-needed scientific information that the American people need to make informed decisions about their health. If Dorsey wants to be a mask busybody while he parties maskless with Beyonce and Jay Z on a yacht, so be it. The mask rules don’t apply to him. But the laws of the United States should and must.

Twitter is no neutral platform. This fact is as obvious as a punch in the mouth, which is exactly what Congress needs to give it. Free speech is as central to the American experiment as any concept is, and as foreign to Twitter as could be.

It would be a shame if screen captures of Atlas’s tweets somehow found their way onto Twitter, I know @Jack would be dismayed — if he’s not in Indonesia engaging in fasting and spiritual development.

Source

Twitter Updates ‘Hacked Materials’ policy after censoring NY Post’s Hunter Biden Exposé

October 16, 2020

After intense backlash for suppressing the spread of the New York Post‘s Hunter Biden emails exposé on its platform, including a Senate subpoena, Twitter announced Thursday night that it’s changing its policy on “hacked materials.”

“Over the last 24 hours, we’ve received significant feedback (from critical to supportive) about how we enforced our Hacked Materials Policy yesterday,” tweeted Vijaya Gadde—Twitter’s lead for legal, policy, and trust and safety—in a nine-part thread. “After reflecting on this feedback, we have decided to make changes to the policy and how we enforce it.”

In her statement, Gadde listed two major changes to the policy. Firstly, Twitter “will no longer remove hacked content unless it is directly shared by hackers or those acting in concert with them.” And then secondly, the site “will label Tweets to provide context instead of blocking links from being shared on Twitter.”

Explaining Twitter’s reasoning, Gadde said that “We believe that labeling Tweets and empowering people to assess content for themselves better serves the public interest and public conversation,” and that the “Hacked Material Policy is being updated to reflect these new enforcement capabilities.”

However, she notes, “All the other Twitter Rules will still apply to the posting of or linking to hacked materials, such as our rules against posting private information, synthetic and manipulated media, and non-consensual nudity.”

When users tried to tweet a link to the exposé or retweet someone who had already tweeted it, a notification preventing them from sharing it would pop up, saying, “The link you are trying to access has been identified by Twitter and our partners as being potentially spammy or unsafe,” and then listing potential reasons for why the link was categorized as such. (See image below)

Twitter originally justified slowing the Wednesday exposé‘s spread because the Hunter Biden emails in question that The Post obtained had allegedly originated from the hard drive of a laptop given to a Delaware repair shop. Because of this, Twitter claimed initially that these emails fell under the umbrella of hacked materials and were unverified.

Seeing this action, many political figures, commentators, journalists, and publications eviscerated Twitter on its very own platform, accusing it of censorship and interfering in the 2020 U.S. presidential election that’s days away.

Complicating matters, because the exposé alleged that former Vice President Joe Biden, the Democratic candidate and father of Hunter Biden, possibly engaged in corruption, conservatives especially went after the social media site. Furthermore, it was the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who have spearheaded the effort to subpoena the company’s CEO, Jack Dorsey.

Faith in the electoral process was already disastrously low, and this only compounds people’s anxiety and lack of trust. Retweeting Gadde’s thread, Dorsey wrote that the “Straight blocking of URLs was wrong, and we updated our policy and enforcement to fix,” adding “Our goal is to attempt to add context, and now we have capabilities to do that,” he added.

Regardless, it is unlikely that these policy changes will fan the flames of this censorship scandal: Too little, too late.

You can follow Douglas Braff on Twitter @Douglas_P_Braff.

Share

Source

Twitter Changes Policy After Censorship Backlash, Claims Biden Emails ‘Hacked’ Without Evidence

A Twitter official announced Thursday night that Twitter will be making changes following the firestorm of backlash after it censored two bombshell New York Post stories.

The first story on Wednesday indicates that Hunter Biden monetized foreign companies’ access to Joe Biden while the latter was vice president. The second story alleges that Hunter pursued business deals with one of China’s largest energy companies in an attempt to cash in “for me and my family.” 

Vijaya Gadde, the global lead for legal, policy, and trust and safety at Twitter, claimed the company will be making “changes to the policy and how we enforce it” after Twitter began banning accounts that tweeted links to the stories, including members of Congress and from congressional servers.

Gadde claims Twitter will “no longer remove hacked content unless it is directly shared by hackers or those acting in concert with them,” and it “will label Tweets to provide context instead of blocking links from being shared on Twitter.” 

Gadde cited that the changes are being made because Twitter wants “to address the concerns that there could be many unintended consequences to journalists, whistleblowers, and others in ways that are contrary to Twitter’s purpose of serving the public conversation.”

Gadde explained that Twitter “put the Hacked Materials Policy in place back in 2018 to discourage and mitigate harms associated with hacks and unauthorized exposure of private information.” However, Gadde conceded that while they were trying to allegedly “find the right balance between people’s privacy and the right of free expression,” Twitter “can do better.”

“We’ve recently added new product capabilities, such as labels to provide people with additional context,” claimed Gadde. “We are no longer limited to Tweet removal as an enforcement action.”

It appears that Twitter will still be censoring certain material by “labeling them,” as Twitter and other big tech companies have routinely done in the past. “We believe that labeling Tweets and empowering people to assess content for themselves better serves the public interest and public conversation,” wrote Gadde. “The Hacked Material Policy is being updated to reflect these new enforcement capabilities.”

“All the other Twitter Rules will still apply to the posting of or linking to hacked materials, such as our rules against posting private information, synthetic and manipulated media, and non-consensual nudity,” wrote Gadde.

Gadde closed her thread stating: “I’m grateful for everyone who has provided feedback and insights over the past day. Content moderation is incredibly difficult, especially in the critical context of an election. We are trying to act responsibly & quickly to prevent harms, but we’re still learning along the way. We will continue to keep you all updated on our progress and more details as we update our policy pages to reflect these changes in the coming days.”

The breaking news comes after Twitter suspended the Trump campaign’s account, locked White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany’s personal account, suspended the New York Post’s Twitter account, and suppressed an official press release from House Judiciary Committee Republicans and others — all of whom were sharing the breaking New York Post story.

Sen. Ted Cruz announced the Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on Tuesday to subpoena Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and that he will testify next Friday.

Source

Senate Judiciary Committee Will Subpoena Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey over NY Post Censorship

The Senate Judiciary Committee announced plans to subpoena Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey after the platform engaged in an unprecedented censorship spree, suspending the account of the New York Post, and locking the accounts of the Trump campaign as well as White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany, in the space of 24 hours.

Twitter also censored links to the website of the House Judiciary Committee, although it later backtracked, calling this decision an “error.”

Via the Wall Street Journal:

The subpoena would require the Twitter executive to testify on Oct. 23 before the committee, according to the Republicans who announced the hearing.

GOP lawmakers are singling out Twitter because it prevented users from posting links to the articles, which the Post said were based on email exchanges with Hunter Biden, the Democratic candidate’s son, provided by allies of President Trump. Those people in turn said they received them from a computer-repair person who found them on a laptop, according to the Post.

The Wall Street Journal hasn’t independently verified the Post articles.

“This is election interference, and we are 19 days out from an election,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas), a committee member who discussed the subpoena with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), told reporters. “Never before have we seen active censorship of a major press publication with serious allegations of corruption of one of the two candidates for president.”

The unprecedented censorship of the past few days was catalyzed by a scramble to suppress the New York Post’s publication of material indicating that Joe Biden, while Vice President, met with an executive at Burisma, the Ukrainian gas giant for which his son Hunter Biden worked.

The former VP previously said, “I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.”

The meeting occurred in the same year that Biden, in his own words, pressured the Ukrainian government to fire a state prosecutor that had been investigating the company.

Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. His new book, #DELETED: Big Tech’s Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal The Election, which contains exclusive interviews with sources inside Google, Facebook, and other tech companies, is currently available for purchase.

Source

FCC Chairman: First Amendment Doesn’t Give Big Tech ‘Special Immunity’ Over The Free Press

The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday announced it will be evaluating the interpretation of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and how it is applied.

“The Commission’s General Counsel has informed me that the FCC has the legal authority to interpret Section 230. Consistent with this advice, I intend to move forward with a rulemaking to clarify its meaning,” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said in a statement.

While Pai said that “many advance an overly broad interpretation that in some cases shields social media companies from consumer protection laws in a way that has no basis in the text of Section 230,” the implied recent actions by the social media companies are not covered by the First Amendment.

“Throughout my tenure at the Federal Communications Commission, I have favored regulatory parity, transparency, and free expression. Social media companies have a First Amendment right to free speech. But they do not have a First Amendment right to a special immunity denied to other media outlets, such as newspapers and broadcasters,” he said.

The FCC announcement follows more than 24 hours of limited distribution and censorship by Facebook and Twitter of the New York Post’s bombshell article detailing Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings. Despite Joe Biden’s previous denial that he knew about Hunter’s business, the emails documented by the Post show that the former vice president might have met with an adviser to the Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

According to Pai, his evaluation of Section 230 will be in congruence with the intent actions already taken by “members of all three branches of the federal government” who “have expressed serious concerns about the prevailing interpretation of the immunity set forth in Section 230 of the Communications Act.”

“There is bipartisan support in Congress to reform the law,” Pai argued. “The U.S. Department of Commerce has petitioned the Commission to ‘clarify ambiguities in section 230.’ And earlier this week, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas pointed out that courts have relied upon ‘policy and purpose arguments to grant sweeping protections to Internet platforms’ that appear to go far beyond the actual text of the provision.”

Senate Republicans on Thursday also announced their intent to subpoena Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to testify in front of the Judiciary Committee about the censorship and suspensions associated with the Post’s report.

“The Senate Judiciary Committee wants to know what the hell is going on,” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said.

Source

Sen. Judiciary Committee to vote to subpoena Twitter CEO over censorship of Hunter Biden exposé

October 15, 2020

The Senate Judiciary Committee announced that on Tuesday they will vote to subpoena Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey over his platform suppressing two New York Post articles about exclusively obtained emails alleging that Hunter Biden took advantage of the position of his father, former Vice President Joe Biden, in his business dealings abroad.

Committee member Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) announced the news of this subpoena vote and an expected October 23 hearing to reporters Thursday morning.

“The committee today will be noticing a mark-up on Tuesday to issue a subpoena to Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter, to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee next Friday,” Sen. Cruz said.

The committee’s reasoning, Cruz explained, is to have Dorsey “come before this committee and the American people and explain why Twitter is abusing their corporate power to silence the press and to cover up allegations of corruption.”

“And let me be clear, I don’t know if these New York Post stories are true or not,” Cruz added after. “Those are questions Vice President Biden should answer. But Twitter and Facebook and Big Tech billionaires don’t get to censor political speech and actively interfere in the election. That’s what they’re doing right now.”

Following the uproar against Twitter’s action, Jack Dorsey said late Wednesday that he regretted how Twitter handled the situation.

“Our communication around our actions on the @nypost article was not great,” the social media executive wrote. “And blocking URL sharing via tweet or DM with zero context as to why we’re blocking: unacceptable.”

According to Twitter, the platform red-flagged the articles for supposedly violating its policy about posting content and information that doesn’t belong to the publisher. The Post obtained a hard drive with the emails on them, coming from a laptop brought to a repair shop in Delaware, Biden’s home state. Biden’s presidential campaign has denied the allegations made by the Post.

Whenever users wanted to share one of the Post‘s articles, they’d be met with a pop-up, saying, “We can’t complete this request because this link has been identified by Twitter or our partners as being potentially harmful.” Anybody who wanted to open or retweet the hyperlink already shared on the platform were also told by Twitter before clicking that the “link may be unsafe.”

At the time of this announcement, Dorsey and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg were already planning to testify on October 28 before the Senate Commerce Committee regarding content published on their platform by users.

RELATED: Senate Authorizes Subpoenas for Big Tech CEOs

The Senate is already jam-packed with important votes and hearings, such as the aforementioned Commerce Committee hearing and the vote to confirm nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. With 19 days until Election Day, this newest event on the calendar carries the potential shake up the conversation about censorship, misinformation, and social media, especially when reporting the election.

Only one thing is for sure, Dorsey and Zuckerberg better book hotel rooms for multiple nights in Washington, DC.

You can follow Douglas Braff on Twitter @Douglas_P_Braff.

Share

Source

GOP Lawmakers demand hearing on Big Tech censorship before Nov. 3

October 15, 2020

With 19 days until the November presidential election, Republican lawmakers on the House Oversight and Reform committee are demanding social media companies answer to their censoring of conservatives and bombshell news reports. The letter, signed by 18 Republican members of the House, requests that an emergency hearing take place as soon as possible.

The letter cites Twitter and Facebook’s censoring of the NYPost’s recent reporting on Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings. The reports allege Hunter Biden used his family’s political power as leverage to make large cash gains in both Ukraine and China.

“Shortly after the story was posted on Facebook, the company decided to ‘reduce its distribution’ in an apparent attempt to limit access to the story. Just as concerning, Facebook reportedly refused to answer basic questions about its decision. Twitter also censored the article and warned users that it is ‘potentially spammy or unsafe,” the Republican letter states.

“Facebook and Twitter have done little to limit distribution of negative stories about President Trump and others who may share his political views. This effort to selectively limit speech based on political affiliation is very concerning.”

Share

Source

Jack Dorsey Breaks Silence on Twitter Censorship, Accepts Blame for Company’s ‘Not Great’ Response

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey finally issued a public comment on his platform’s decision to censor what is arguably the top story in America today, the New York Post’s publication of a cache of emails revealing hitherto unknown alleged links between Vice President Joe Biden and Burisma, a Ukrainian gas giant for which his son worked.

“Our communication around our actions on the [New York Post] article was not great,” admitted Dorsey. “And blocking URL sharing via tweet or DM with zero context as to why we’re blocking: unacceptable.”

It’s possible that Twitter’s purge of the New York Post story, which exceeded even Facebook’s censorship (Facebook “reduced the distribution” of the Post’s story, instead of locking accounts and banning links), was not driven by Dorsey himself.

Sources at Twitter have suggested individuals directly below the CEO, in particular Trust & Safety Vice President Del Harvey and Vijaya Gadde, also a member of the Trust & Safety team, as the main agitators pushing for draconian censorship at the Silicon Valley giant.

Dorsey’s tweet, which quotes the @TwitterSafety account, appears to be a direct criticism of the way the Trust & Safety department handled the issue.

In a series of Tweets, @TwitterSafety attempted to explain the company’s behavior.

“We want to provide much needed clarity around the actions we’ve taken with respect to two NY Post articles that were first Tweeted this morning.”

“The images contained in the articles include personal and private information — like email addresses and phone numbers — which violate our rules.”

“As noted this morning, we also currently view materials included in the articles as violations of our Hacked Materials Policy.”

“Commentary on or discussion about hacked materials, such as articles that cover them but do not include or link to the materials themselves, aren’t a violation of this policy. Our policy only covers links to or images of hacked material themselves.”

“We know we have more work to do to provide clarity in our product when we enforce our rules in this manner. We should provide additional clarity and context when preventing the Tweeting or DMing of URLs that violate our policies.”

Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. His new book, #DELETED: Big Tech’s Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal The Election, which contains exclusive interviews with sources inside Google, Facebook, and other tech companies, is currently available for purchase.

Source

Every Republican Lawmaker Must Condemn Big Tech’s Election Interference

The actions of Facebook and Twitter today represent nothing less than a brazen attempt by corrupt Big Tech partisans who intend to steal the election from the American people.

On Wednesday morning, the New York Post published a blockbuster story — complete with e-mails, documents, and photographs — detailing the efforts of Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden’s son Hunter to sell his father’s influence to foreign oligarchs with an interest in swaying American foreign policy to support their own business efforts. And by Wednesday afternoon, monopolistic social media giants Facebook and Twitter moved to throttle and even outright ban circulation of the New York Post story.

There’s no need to speculate on why they did this. There is no justification for safety or the public interest. No one’s life was put at risk by this information. They took these actions for blatantly partisan reasons: They want Joe Biden to win.

The announcements themselves came from partisans who traded their political access for careers in Silicon Valley. When Twitter earlier this year banned the President of the United States — the leader of the free world — from tweeting a video to an interview he did on the largest cable news network in the country, it announced that action via Nick Pacilio, a former communications staffer for Democratic vice presidential Kamala Harris.

Facebook’s announcement that it would throttle access to the New York Post’s investigative reporting came via Andy Stone, a former Democratic congressional and campaign staffer who worked for Barbara Boxer and John Kerry.

As of this moment, every American voter is currently banned from linking to news reported by one of the largest papers in one of the largest states in the country. Even The New York Post’s primary Twitter account has been locked — they claim the Hunter Biden stories violate their rules against the “distribution of hacked material” — something that apparently didn’t matter regarding President Trump’s illegally obtained tax returns. Twitter users can’t even direct message the story. That’s how much CEO Jack Dorsey doesn’t want you to know what’s in it.

This represents far more than a one-off incident of an algorithm mistakenly censoring an article or user post. Instead, it is a coordinated declaration of partisan war on America’s electoral process by the unelected tech oligarch class against the American people, making use of the monopoly power and federal legal immunity afforded to these globalist overlords by the U.S. Congress and federal anti-trust authorities.

The latest effort to ban Americans from reading news about candidates for federal office represents an intentional and very public information coup. It’s long past time that the lawmakers who represent the country stand up and say enough is enough: They will no longer be able to muzzle the American public or its First Amendment free press under color of license via section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

That particular section of federal law immunizes digital platforms from certain speech published by its users or other third-parties. And even though the law gives them no protection for statements or actions they take as publishers, many courts (and most D.C.-based tech policy non-profits) have been either conned or purchased into believing that Facebook, Twitter, and Google are similarly exempt from any liability for what those institutions themselves publish of their own volition.

Thus, a law drafted to protect companies from civil liability for removing third-party-posted illegal content like child pornography is now being used as a shield against all liability, and a sword against any individual or institution who posts something that conflicts with the left-wing views of the Silicon Valley technorati.

This week, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas indicated this is an issue the Court is ready to consider if a Congress heavily influenced by Big Tech money will not. “When Congress enacted the statute, most of today’s major Internet platforms did not exist,” he wrote, “And in the 24 years since, we have never interpreted this provision. But many courts have construed the law broadly to confer sweeping immunity on some of the largest companies in the world.”

“Extending §230 immunity beyond the natural reading of the text can have serious consequences” he added, noting that while the issue is not before the Court yet, “in an appropriate case, it behooves us to do so.”

America’s elected Republicans should not wait for the Court. If Silicon Valley insists, in the vein of George Orwell’s unfortunately prophetic INGSOC, on enforcing Newspeak guidelines regardless of their relation to reality, thereby declaring openly partisan war against American news consumers, then the elected representatives of the only major political party left in America that still believes in and defends the First Amendment needs to declare war right back.

For years, Big Tech did nothing to stop the vicious and false Russian collusion hoax, which was perpetrated on the American people by Russian agent Christopher Steele and suspected Russian spy Igor Danchenko. For years, Big Tech had no problem with foreign election meddlers using its platforms to cripple the American presidency. Big Tech was fine with corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs using illegal leaks and fake news to attempt the literal overthrow and ouster of the U.S. president. Instead, they expressed their deep concern about the influence of laughable memes of Jesus endorsing Donald Trump.

Big Tech’s quislings will claim that they treat all information the same, that they would never put their dirty thumbs on the scale in favor of one party or ideological movement over the other, and that even if they did, there are reasons why this or that is a special case. But everyone with eyes to see knows the truth by now: that’s nonsense.

Enough is enough. Lawmakers can stand by and watch Big Tech steamroll information in an un-American attempt to manipulate our elections while muzzling hundreds of millions of Americans, or they can stand up and drive a spoke in the wheel.

Source

Twitter: ‘Louisville Will Burn’ Doesn’t Violate Our Rules

A tweet encouraging arson in Louisville, Kentucky, posted a day before violent riots once again broke out across multiple American cities including Louisville, did not violate the Twitter rules, according to a spokeswoman for the social media giant, despite the company dedicating itself in 2018 to improving “conversational health” on the platform.

“Louisville, KY will burn tonight” tweeted Lee G News, the account of an independent black vlogger with a moderately sized following.

The tweet included a picture of the vlogger and one other person holding raised fists, wearing masks bearing the name “Breonna Taylor.”

While the account itself is not particularly influential, Twitter’s official response to the tweet indicates that the platform has a high tolerance for tweets promoting the domestic terrorist violence that has been endemic in American cities over the past four months.

“I can confirm that the Tweet referenced does not violate Twitter Rules,” a Twitter spokeswoman told Breitbart News.

The tweet was later deleted by the author, but evidence of its existence can be found in internet archives.

In the wake of the Breonna Taylor ruling, multiple other twitter users posted viral tweets with similar sentiments, with no action taken by Twitter to prevent their spread. In fact, it became a trending topic on the platform, which made a commitment to improve “conversational health” in 2018.

“…burn it all down,” said Guy Ben-Aharon, a Twitter user with a “verified” checkmark — the platform’s stamp of approval.

“I hope they burn Louisville down tonight … Burn it down, the college the precincts the whole thing,” said another user in a tweet that gained hundreds of retweets.

“I hope they burn down the entire city of Louisville,” says a tweet that gained over four hundred retweets.

The violence being encouraged by Twitter users, with the tacit approval of the platform, has already led to two police officers being shot in the city of Louisville. The two officers are currently being treated and are reportedly in a stable condition.

Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. His upcoming book, #DELETED: Big Tech’s Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal The Election, which contains exclusive interviews with sources inside Google, Facebook, and other tech companies, is currently available for purchase. 

Source