Twitter had been openly suppressing conservative voices. The extent to which they were suppressed could be seen days after Musk’s takeover. Multiple major Republican candidates suddenly secured thousands of additional followers, while the opposite was true for Democrats.
Florida’s Governor DeSantis saw 3,770 new followers on the first day of Musk’s takeover. Within four days, DeSantis’ followers rose by 148,000. Texas Senator Ted Cruz saw an increase of 1,676 on Musk’s first day, followed by another 41,000 a few days later. Georgia Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene added 1,995 new followers on day one, 41,520 on day two, and 24,287 more on day three. Matt Gaetz, Lauren Boebert, Donald Trump Jr., Kari Lake, and others all saw sudden rises.
On the other hand, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York shed thousands of followers, as did other squad members. Former President Obama and Vice President Harris also saw a sharp decline in followers, presumably bot accounts.
All of this happened before Twitter even revamped the algorithm. The silent majority was, in fact, silenced on Twitter.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 7, 2022 | sundance
At 10:22am today, billionaire businessman and new Owner/CEO of Twitter, Elon Musk, has recommended that voters choose republican candidates for congress this midterm election cycle. [Source]
Democrats and left-wing political activist groups are going bananas.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 7, 2022 | Sundance
In the past week the mainstream media and U.S. government interests have collectively been in a state of apoplexy as Elon Musk took ownership of Twitter and began announcing changes.
As a result of the management change, there have been some new discoveries about the internal operations of the social media platform that are worth highlighting. [Background Context Here] Additionally, it seems likely that Musk’s focus on the technology side of the operation might soon lead to [¹]interesting discoveries. However, let’s start by reviewing information discovered in the management change.
First, it is important to recognize that Twitter is simply a massive global commenting and information sharing system. Twitter, the platform itself, does not provide any content, all content (comments, pictures, videos, links to articles etc) is provided by the users of the platform. In essence it is a big chat room or commenting system. The main point to remember is that Twitter does not provide any content, the platform simply provides the hosting system for the conversation itself.
♦ “Verification” – Individual accounts on Twitter could request to be ‘verified’ by Twitter to validate their identity as a specific user of the platform. This is the “blue check” process that assigns a blue check badge to the user upon verification.
Apparently, the verification badge morphed into some form of enhanced credibility for the user almost like a tiered social system or class system. The ‘Blue Checks’ considered themselves more important than the average user and that verification system then became something of a status symbol.
Inside the administration system of Twitter, the assignment of the verification badge became a tool for the Twitter admins to elevate some user accounts as more important than others.
However, apparently with the new management in place, it has been discovered that verification badge status was also for sale. For a secret fee, if you knew the right people, you could purchase a verified status. Of course, no one ever knew this before, and it seems very sketchy. [See comment above left]
Knowing that some users purchased their verification status, the apoplexy over Elon Musk deciding to allow any user to verify their status for an $8/month fee, now takes on a new perspective.
Obviously, the verified users who purchased their elevated status would feel ripped off if anyone could now get verified, that’s issue #1.
Issue #2 is the diminished level of importance of a ‘blue check’ badge or credential if it is available to anyone. The internal class system is removed.
This is the second point of contention amid those who are not happy with the verification proposed by Elon Musk. It sounds absurd, but the level of anger over this leveling of the caste system has led to claims of widespread verification status being called a national security threat.
Apparently, many of the ‘Blue Checks’ on Twitter are really full of themselves, and do not like the idea that under new management any of the unwashed masses could gain a verification badge. Combined with the knowledge that U.S. government and intelligence officials were part of the background Twitter discussion prior to Elon Musk, it would appear the ‘blue check’ system was akin to a verified user license, ID or passport.
It all sounds really weird, but that’s the type of internal dynamic that was ongoing within the platform.
♦ Next up, speech control. We discover from the people who were notified of their job loss, that Twitter had individual specialized groups or units within the admin functions who monitored the conversation.
There was a “climate change unit”, a “human rights” unit, a “public health” unit and various other moderation divisions within the platform.
These “units” are groups of people who monitored the public discussion with special interest. Again, for emphasis, Twitter never provided any content, so the workers in these units were simply conversation monitors or moderators who were tasked with reviewing, approving or removing comments (user content) specific to their unit specialty. This is where the censorship stuff originated.
If you posted a comment about the subject of climate change, your comment was subject to review by internal Twitter monitors who were authorized to control the comment itself. The same outlook applied to a host of subjects as defined by the Twitter organization. There are thousands of these conversation monitors, each with a specific subject they are assigned to monitor. Again, it sounds absurd, but that is what was taking place.
It is not yet fully understood how many different subjects were monitored by specialized thought police, but it seems to be a rather extensive network of very costly employees as moderators depending on the subject matter of the conversation being controlled. This reality explains why opinions or comments that ran counter to the ideological orthodoxy of the monitors were removed.
Again, a bizarre moderation system akin to conversation monitors being placed in the workplace lunchroom, each assigned to look out for discussion of topics they were assigned to control, and then correcting anyone who spoke about an issue in violation of the acceptable company opinion. It’s all just bizarre, but thousands of those jobs were what Elon Musk removed in last week’s wave of layoffs.
The removal of these conversation monitors, public comment moderators, is another big point of contention by the leftists who now fear that anyone will be able to speak on the platform without being censored or controlled.
The media and government officials are worried about seeing comments from government skeptics, election deniers, climate change deniers, or people in other countries with different social outlooks toward sex, gender, traditional marriage, religion or geopolitical worldviews that run counter to the interests of the United States government. This seems to be the foundation of the Intel Community claim about a national security threat created by the removal of moderators.
This level of conversational control explains why the U.S. government held a vested interest in Twitter as a global communication platform. Example: a Russian national might start to compare the FBI to the FSB, plant seeds of intellectual inquiry amid the U.S. reader/user and stir up discontent on a larger scale. Thousands of Twitter moderators were assigned to filter through the commenting system while various flags and algorithmic warnings were created to facilitate tight control.
The entire moderation system sounds like an Orwellian construct because it is.
Removing this level of control over the platform is what has made Twitter’s new owner and CEO Elon Musk a threat to the global order of things.
Posted originally on the conservative November 6, 2022 | Sundance
The media pearl-clutching over changes to the Twitter social media platform has become detached from reality. During a Face the Nation discussion today, a very serious Margaret Brennan and Kris Krebs, former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) outline the national security risks created by Elon Musk’s change to the “verified Twitter user” system. The “blue checks.”
Mr Krebs outlined how bad actors from Russia, Iran and China could potentially write mean words on Twitter and create social collapse in the United States as a result of election interference, defined as misinformation and disinformation. Additionally, the unified western military order is at risk from the national security threat posed by allowing random unmonitored discussion on a social media platform. With the midterm election this week, people could die if Elon Musk removes the control filters on the global conversation. WATCH:
[Transcript] – […] BRENNAN: We return to our conversation now about election security with CBS News, cybersecurity expert and analyst Chris Krebs. Chris, I want to talk about something that’s happening right now. Social media has already changed the way we communicate and, certainly, our political world. President Biden said a few days ago that he has concerns about billionaire Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter- said, “the platform spews lies all across the world. There’s no editors anymore in America, there are no editors, how do we expect kids to be able to understand what is at stake?” It’s not just kids, right? What concerns do you have about this happening just days before the election, these changes to Twitter?
KREBS: Well, I think I think the government for one has a mechanism by which they can review the acquisition, the Committee for Foreign Investment in the United States can take a look at particularly the second and third ownership positions in Twitter, including Saudi Arabia. That is something that I’m assuming that the Treasury Department is taking a look at right now to see if they can put in place a national security agreement or even potentially unwind the purchase. But I think more specifically to what’s happening right now with Twitter, I think there are kind of- there are two “Elons” that we are seeing. There’s the public Elon, that’s, you know, trolling and saying $8, please, on all the complaints about some of the shifts in the moderation and other activities. Then there’s what’s happening behind the scenes, the conversations with the civil rights groups, with advertisers, with the teens, which perhaps maybe a little bit more stable. And I think if you look at the platform itself right now, not a whole lot has changed. That may not be a popular opinion, but I think the reality is that most, you haven’t seen too much of a change in the moderation. Now, the concern, though, is what happens tomorrow, where you can buy the blue tick for $8 a month, Twitter Blue–
MARGARET BRENNAN: For our viewers who don’t use Twitter, a blue check is a sign of credibility.
KREBS: It has historically been a marker of trust, and that Twitter has said, we’ve confirmed and authenticated the identity of this person, which tends to be a politician, or a news media personality or a journalist, an academic or someone that may be a popular voice in certain civil rights, civil liberties issue.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Now you can buy it for eight bucks a month.
KREBS: Along with a number of other features of editing and longer-form video posting. But again, to have such a dramatic shift in that marker of trust, now you can buy it, in advance of as we’ve been talking about a very contentious and important election. It opens the information space to a broader community of influencers, clout chasers, election denialists–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Foreign actors?
KREBS: Absolutely, I mean, we’ve seen reports lately of Russia, China and Iran, back at their old tricks, and it is going to create a very chaotic environment.
MARGARET BRENNAN: To that point in- in 2018, during the midterms, [U.S] Cyber Command took offensive operations to take out Russian trolls who are spreading misinformation. The New York Times has a story today saying Russia is back at it. What does that say to you about U.S. defenses?
KREBS: Well, I think so Recorded Future and Graphika, two research firms have released information that Russian bots, trolls, associated with the Internet Research Agency, which is a group that targeted since the 2016 and the 2018 election, are back at it and are undermining this time Democratic candidates for Senate in some of the- the more contentious races. I think what it says is that the- there’s a broader community of actors, they recognize that political discourse is very divisive here in the US, and they have more opportunities, probably than ever before, to continue to undermine confidence to create chaos, which is really, their primary objective here. It’s not necessarily that a winner wins, but that we’ve all lost- lost confidence and they degrade the American democracy experiment.
MARGARET BRENNAN: There are also a number of sitting Senators, and of note, Ambassador Richard Grinnell former President Trump’s Acting Director of National Intelligence has been posting some misleading information, that’s him on the screen, about the election. He said, “any state which doesn’t count all the votes and announce the winner Tuesday night is incompetent.”–
KREBS: So all 50 states then, by that formulation,
MARGARET BRENNAN: Because what you’re saying is just the fact that votes are never finalized on election night. But why do you think someone who knows better is posting something like that?
KREBS: Well, whether he knows better, I can’t assume that, but the point here is that it’s for clout chasing, it’s for influence. There’s a reward system and structure set up right now within the far-right of the GOP that provides additional engagement. So, you tweet something like that, and you can see your likes, your retweets, your amplification really take off. And if you’re just talking about some other, you know, more mundane domestic issue, nobody cares. But there’s a reward system and incentive structure that’s set up where exactly this sort of messaging is- is rewarded. It’s encouraged, and, and this is again, going back to Governor Sununu’s comments, we need leaders to lead. We need the presumptive leaders of the Republican Party to stand up and say this is unacceptable, this is not how it works. We need to be good faith actors in this process and unfortunately, leaders aren’t leading right now.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Chris Krebs, thank you as always for your analysis and we will see you on election night as part of CBS coverage at our democracy desk here at CBS News. (LINK)
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 4, 2022 | Sundance
As anticipated, Blue Check Twitter is big mad today….
(Politico) – Elon Musk began firing hundreds of Twitter employees on Friday, four days before the midterm elections, including members of the teams that work on U.S. elections and content moderation on the high-profile social-media platform.
Tweets flooded the platform on Friday, many using the hashtags #LoveWhereYouWork and #OneTeam, as employees let others know that they had been let go. Many of those posting had previously worked in roles including public policy, trust and safety, communications, engineering, marketing and human resources.
Half of Twitter’s public policy team was cut, including members of a team handling verification of politicians’ accounts, according to a person close to the company who requested anonymity. That work will now be folded into a team rolling out a subscription service that is expected to launch on Nov. 7.
[…] Friday’s layoffs, however, appear to be adding fuel to the anxieties of both users and advertisers that Twitter is gutting its ability to keep tabs on who and what shows up on its platform. And the across-the-board cuts come just as the company’s moderation systems are expected to be tested during the midterms.
In a press call, a coalition of civil rights and activists groups called #StopToxicTwitter called for a global pause on advertising in the light of the mass layoffs on Friday. […] “With today’s mass layoffs, it’s clear that Musk’s actions betray his words,” Jessica González, co-CEO of the media advocacy group Free Press, said on the call. (read more)
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 3, 2022 | Sundance
In the prediction section of the recent Twitter discussion {Go Deep} CTH mentioned the reason and unspoken motive behind a prediction that multinational corporations would start to pull their advertising money from Elon Musk.
We are simply in an era where there is no distinction between the WEF guidance for multinational corporations and the instructions toward governments’ they support. Free speech and freedom of expression are against both their interests.
Multinational corporations are political entities. The former distinctions between the private and public sector have been purposefully erased. Evidence can be found in the vaccination mandate and within corporate responses to voter outcomes during elections. {Go Deep}
As predicted, it begins….
(Via Wall Street Journal) – Food company General Mills Inc., Oreo maker Mondelez International Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Volkswagen/Audi are among a growing list of brands that have temporarily paused their Twitter advertising in the wake of the takeover of the company by Elon Musk, according to people familiar with the matter.
Some advertisers are concerned that Mr. Musk could scale back content moderation, which they worry would lead to an increase in objectionable content on the platform. Others are temporarily halting their ads because of the uncertainty at the company as top executives exit and Mr. Musk considers a raft of changes, some of the people said.
Kelsey Roemhildt, a spokeswoman for General Mills, whose brands include Cheerios, Bisquick and Häagen-Dazs, confirmed the company has paused Twitter ads. “As always, we will continue to monitor this new direction and evaluate our marketing spend,” she said.
A Twitter representative didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
General Motors Co. paused its spending on the social-media platform last week.
Several ad buyers say they expect the number of brands pausing Twitter ads to rise. They say that the platform isn’t considered a must-buy for many advertisers, with far larger budgets going to tech giants such as Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Meta Platforms Inc., and that pausing makes sense during the bumpy transition under Mr. Musk.
Many executives on Madison Avenue are uneasy with the rash of sudden executive departures from Twitter’s advertising sales and marketing units. Among those who have exited are Chief Customer Officer Sarah Personette, Chief Marketing Officer Leslie Berland, and Jean-Philippe Maheu, Twitter’s vice president of global client solutions. Those executives helped reassure advertisers that their ad dollars were being spent wisely and appropriately on Twitter. (read more)
Fascism was traditionally defined as an authoritarian government working hand-in-glove with corporations to achieve objectives. A centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, using severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
That system of government didn’t work in the long-term, because the underlying principles of free people reject government authoritarianism. Fascist governments collapsed, and the corporate beneficiaries were nulled and scorned for participating. Then, along came a new approach to achieve the same objective.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) was created to use the same fundamental associations of government and corporations. Only this time, it was the multinational corporations who organized to tell the government(s) what to do.
The WEF was organized for multinational corporations to assemble and tell the various governments how to cooperate with them, in order to be rewarded by them. Corporatism was/is the outcome. The government is now doing what the multinationals tell them to do, and in return the multinationals install the compliant politicians.
Fascism, the cooperation between government and corporations, is still the underlying premise; the World Economic Forum simply flipped the internal dynamic putting the corporations in charge of handing out the instructions.
What results is a slightly modified definition of fascism:
…A massive multinational corporate conglomerate; telling a centralized autocratic government leader what to do; and using severe economic and social regimentation as a control mechanism; combined with forcible suppression of opposition by both the corporations and government.
Doesn’t that define our current reality, especially visible in the era of COVID?
The instructions from the multinational corporations to government would be called the “Great Reset“, or as commonly transposed by the government officials receiving the instructions, “Build Back Better”.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 2, 2022 | Sundance
The team at Rumble Video have taken a strong position in defense of free speech, an open internet and protection of a diverse public square.
Apparently, the French government demanded that Rumble remove content the government does not support. [Source] Rumble said no.
Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski then followed up delivering a statement via Twitter: “The French Government has demanded that Rumble (@rumblevideo) block Russian news sources. Like @elonmusk, I won’t move our goal posts for any foreign government. Rumble will turn off France entirely (France isn’t material to us) and we will challenge the legality of this demand.”
Pavlovski and Rumble being transparent and making the demand from the French government public raises a few questions.
Rumble said ‘no’, but who said ‘yes’?
The French Government has demanded that Rumble (@rumblevideo) block Russian news sources. Like @elonmusk, I won't move our goal posts for any foreign government.
Rumble will turn off France entirely (France isn't material to us) and we will challenge the legality of this demand. https://t.co/a4Nn4S1MMf
It would be highly unlikely that Rumble is the only tech platform the French government have contacted with their demands. What did the other platform providers do?
How many other ‘western‘ governments make demands on content from Big Tech platform providers that we do not know about?
On the domestic side, the issue of what France is demanding is essentially analogous with what the U.S. government (DHS) has been doing within the censorship discussion recently highlighted by The Intercept. However, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Google and Microsoft have not been open with the American people about these back-channel discussions and demands from the U.S. government.
Most of what we are now learning about government control over social media content is coming as a result of a lawsuit filed by the State of Missouri against the Biden administration.
(New York Post) – A little-noticed federal lawsuit, Missouri v. Biden, is uncovering astonishing evidence of an entrenched censorship scheme cooked up between the federal government and Big Tech that would make Communist China proud.
So far, 67 officials or agencies — including the FBI — have been accused in the lawsuit of violating the First Amendment by pressuring Facebook, Twitter and Google to censor users for alleged misinformation or disinformation.
Victims of the Biden-Big Tech “censorship enterprise” include The Post, whose Hunter Biden laptop exposé was suppressed by Facebook and then Twitter in October 2020 after the FBI went to Facebook, warning it with great specificity to watch out for a “dump” of Russian disinformation, pertaining to Joe Biden, with an uncanny resemblance to our stories.
“We allege that top-ranking Biden administration officials colluded with those social media companies to suppress speech about the Hunter Biden laptop story, the origins of COVID-19, the efficacy of masks, and election integrity,” is how the lawsuit was summarized by intrepid Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, who is leading the action.
The censorship related to alleged “misinformation” about pandemic lockdowns, vaccines and COVID-19, and included material from the esteemed infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists associated with the Great Barrington Declaration, which proved over time to be correct and eventually much of which was adopted as official policy by the CDC.
Defendants include FBI special agents Elvis Chan and Laura Dehmlow, who gave Facebook that detailed “disinformation” briefing right before The Post was censored; White House press secretaries, current and former, Karine Jean-Pierre and Jen Psaki; Dr. Anthony Fauci, the president’s chief medical adviser, and former White House senior COVID-19 adviser Andrew Slavitt; counsel to President Biden Dana Remus; the DHS over the disbanded Disinformation Governance Board; the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency; the FDA; the State Department; and the US Election Assistance Commission.
Last month a federal judge ordered a reluctant Fauci and Jean-Pierre to hand over their records, so the case is progressing nicely.(read more)
As various entities and Big Tech platforms prepare to launch lawfare litigation, a strategy built on threats, against any member of the Rebel Alliance who outlines the schemes and connections between government and Big Tech, they would be wise to reconsider the unstable cornerstone of their position…
…Why would any social media platform, at any scale and on any level, be in any relationship with the United States government?
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 1, 2022 | Sundance
At this point in history, anyone who is claiming the U.S. Government is not directly coordinating with social media platforms to shape opinion and cull information adverse to their interests, is being intellectually dishonest. There is simply too much evidence of the intelligence apparatus, specifically the Dept of Homeland Security, being enmeshed with the platforms of Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Google and Microsoft.
The DHS justifications for the relationship all involve claims of ‘national security’ and domestic terror threats. However, the simple and transparent motivations of the relationship are all political. The DHS terms of “disinformation, misinformation and malinformation” are simply excuses for the platforms to adhere to the demands of the government and censor or remove discussion that is against the interests of those in power. The truth of this is in the sunlight now.
That said, the relationship between the intelligence community and social media is one of mutual benefit. DHS gets to conduct surveillance and control permitted speech in the public square, and in return Big Tech gets assurances of their ability to continue monopolistic enterprise and simultaneously receive subsidies on operational costs. The legislative branch allows this synergy without oversight because the legislative branch is in alignment with the larger ‘national security’ ruse.
Into this mix it is worth revisiting congressional testimony from former Twitter founder and CEO Jack Dorsey on March 25, 2021. The hearing was on “disinformation” [Transcript Link]:
A shared hashing protocol is a form of data system integration. Look at what Dorsey was saying about “Blue Sky” his latest big tech initiative, on March 25,2021.
Now, remember the admissions in July, 2021:
July 26, 2021,(Reuters) – A counterterrorism organization formed by some of the biggest U.S. tech companies including Facebook (FB.O) and Microsoft (MSFT.O) is significantly expanding the types of extremist content shared between firms in a key database, aiming to crack down on material from white supremacists and far-right militias, the group told Reuters.
Until now, the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism’s (GIFCT) database has focused on videos and images from terrorist groups on a United Nations list and so has largely consisted of content from Islamist extremist organizations such as Islamic State, al Qaeda and the Taliban.
Over the next few months, the group will add attacker manifestos – often shared by sympathizers after white supremacist violence – and other publications and links flagged by U.N. initiative Tech Against Terrorism. It will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes, adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.
The firms, which include Twitter (TWTR.N) and Alphabet Inc’s (GOOGL.O) YouTube, share “hashes,” unique numerical representations of original pieces of content that have been removed from their services. Other platforms use these to identify the same content on their own sites in order to review or remove it. (more)
A shared hashing protocol is a form of data system integration.
When The Intercept is talking about portals between DHS and social media, the “shared protocols” is the technical name for the data integration between the U.S. government and Social Media.
Now…. again, keep in mind what Dorsey is saying about his Blue Sky network app for a new inclusive social media platform. A network that would be established with these “shared protocols.” Look carefully at what is written in the Intercept Article about the Intelligence Community engagement:
[…] Intelligence agencies backed new startups designed to monitor the vast flow of information across social networks to better understand emerging narratives and risks. (link)
Jack Dorsey is creating Blue Sky app, a new platform that will connect social media networks and will contain “shared protocols” with the Dept of Homeland Security. Meanwhile, the U.S. intelligence agencies are funding new startup companies to “monitor the vast flow of information across social media networks.”
Do you see it?
Dorsey is creating another Magic Coffee Shop. This one will be called “Blue Sky.” It will contain shared protocols.
Against the previous government relationships established by Dorsey, the financing for this network is almost certainly coming from the U.S Intelligence Community.
Can you see it now?
Last point.
A prediction…..
Considering the multinational corporate relationships already established in this new WEF inspired fascist system,…. and considering that Blackrock and Vanguard are the largest shareholders in most major multinationals…… and considering that Blackrock is embedded in the White House via Tom Donilon…. Watch the multinational corporate advertisers all exit Twitter in an effort to kneecap Elon Musk as they switch to support…. wait for it…. Blue Sky!
A tripwire is now created: If Elon Musk continues to sing the praises of Jack Dorsey, then Musk is either naive to the scheming around him, or Musk is in on the scheme.
Tom Donilon is a deep DC swamp operator and has been for his entire career. Donilon is connected to every tentacle of the Obama and Biden administrations. Donilon is also the Chairman of the BlackRock Investment Institute. We have written about the conflicts {Go Deep Here} and {Go Deep Here}.
Tom Donilon’s literal job description at Blackrock is to “leverage the firm’s expertise and generate proprietary research to provide insights on the global economy, markets, geopolitics and long-term asset allocation,” and in June 2022 the State Dept appointed him as Co-Chair of the U.S. foreign policy advisory board.
Specifically, the Biden administration put Blackrock Investment Institute Chairman Tom Donilon in charge of U.S-China policy.
(STATE DEPT) – Today, Secretary Blinken announced his selections for the U.S. Department of State’s Foreign Affairs Policy Board.
Since its establishment in 2011, the Board has provided independent advice on the conduct of U.S. foreign policy and diplomacy, consistent with each Secretary of State and administration’s evolving priorities for it.
Secretary Blinken has sought to build a diverse board that could advance the Department’s efforts to better root American diplomacy in the needs and aspirations of the American people. With expertise at the intersection of foreign and domestic policy, the Board will focus on the issues of increasing importance to the lives and livelihoods of Americans in the decade ahead, including cybersecurity and emerging technologies, climate and energy, international economics, global health, and strategic competition with the People’s Republic of China. (read more)
It doesn’t matter how sketchy the deep state tentacles are, their motives always come back to money.
All eyes are on Twitter after Elon Musk acquired the company for $44 billion. Musk took Twitter public but plans to make it available to shareholders in another five years as he believes he can reach one billion subscribers by that time. The eccentric billionaire began his takeover by bringing an actual kitchen sink to Twitter headquarters – and he indeed threw out everything “but the kitchen sink,” as the phrase goes.
First, the original board of misinformation was fired. The former CEO and many top-level executives were laid off. Twitter engineers were replaced with Tesla engineers who began working on changing the algorithm. That specific algorithm has been used to silence conservative voices and anyone going against the general narrative.
President Joe Biden was fact-checked for claiming that his Inflation Reduction Act would crack down on 55 corporations failing to pay their fair share in taxes. Twitter added context to his post and explained that only 14 of the 55 companies had earnings over $1 billion and would be the only companies eligible under the new tax law. The president or left, in general, would NEVER have faced a fact check. Musk even personally replied to a tweet from Hillary Clinton in a mocking way and obviously did not have his account banned. The left may still bash the right too.
Could you imagine if the algorithm that stifled COVID-free speech was alive and well from the beginning of 2020? People may have seen a different side to the story.
Some are worried that hateful speech will prevail on Twitter. After a certain derogatory word began trending, engineers discovered that it was part of a “trolling campaign” where around 300 bots were responsible for promoting that word in an effort to discredit the new platform. Bots or fake accounts will face bans, but people may speak freely on the platform.
Former President Trump is permitted to rejoin the social network, but he said he would stay on his Truth Social. It will be interesting to see what happens on Twitter now that all voices can freely speak without punishment.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 