Indeed…what does the Biden administration plan on doing with the list of journalists that are potentially embarrassing that administration? That is a good question.
Nope, time for the FTC to document before congress what started this campaign and to show the relevance of each request to the consent decree, and how, if relevance is shown, how it can be adjusted to interfere as little as possible with the free press.
It’s not for nothing this wound up in the committee handling the weaponization of government agencies.
Do you think that “other requested information” means whatever information the FTC requests, such as a list of every woman Musk has ever dated and what his favorite food is, or do you think that “other requested information” means information that has some relevance to the consent decree?
No, it isn’t. It’s an incredibly stupid question, meant to stoke nonsensical fears but maintain plausible deniability. It’s weaponizer emotional nonsense, but very on-brand for the right, these days.
What has the Biden administration done to Matt Taibbi or any other the others who’ve written the stories?
I expect they’ll do the same to any others on the list.
1 Like
V
The document you linked to specifically states that the data referred to is the information of consumers. It does not mention employee information.
The consent decree was put into place because Twitter was selling user data - but the terms are all contained within the four corners of the document.
And I am getting an incredibly stupid response. The answer is, if the Biden administration is going to do nothing with that information, then the Biden administration does not need to be requesting that information.
But then, just letting journalists know they are being noticed by the government could be reason enough for asking about it.
You need to read the definitions section of that document. Incidents are defined in terms of consumer incidents. Information is defined in terms of user data. This does not include employee incidents or FBI data or the information of some pedestrian walking down the street.
“Covered information” means information from or about an individual consumer…”.
Well, that’s the question, isn’t it? Was any non-public user data released, along with those internal emails?
I imagine that’s what the FTC is trying to find out.
Twitter violated the consent decree back in May, and they were fined $150,000,000 and the decree was modified to be even stronger.
1 Like
Well, I took the time to read the consent decree a little more thoroughly, and there are some doozys in there.
Not only can the FTC ask Twitter for the names of the people Twitter released the “Files” to - they can also depose every Twitter employee involved with releasing the “Files,” demand copies of every email sent between Twitter employees involving the release of the files, or any number various discovery devises.
Twitter was also obligated to do a very in-depth privacy review before releasing the “Files,” too - and there’s quite an extensive list of requirements of those privacy reviews and the recordkeeping of them. I wonder how thorough their review was?
I expect the FTC will have some questions about that, too.
I see Musk in a very idiotic attempt to keep his Twitter cred had to embarrassingly rehire an employer who he publicly humiliated.
I am sure when his lawyers explained to Musk a little piece of legislation called the Americans with Disabilities Act which legislates making reasonable accommodations for employees with disabilities and the fact this employee was entitled to $100 million as terms of selling his business to Twitter, he realized he had made a pretty big mistake.
Define begging, and show us the begging from Elon Musk to Elton John.
Libs ■■■■■■ the whole country and you think they’re going to do anything but focus on someone else’s house? Look at how they’re turning The Twitter Files into The Trump Thread. 
1 Like
Democrats in Congress are going after the journalists now, trying to force them to reveal the sources of their information and accusing them of being “So called” journalists.
At the same time Biden’s FTC is trying to compile a list of all journalists who may have looked at Twitter documents, which has an obvious intimidation factor.
The Democrat’s war on journalism and the Constitution.
4 Likes
Liars do not like being challenged.
4 Likes
They are not confidential sources. Lol.
That’s a nice try though
Democrats went after sources during the Obama admin during th leak investigations. One of the biggest civil rights violations in recent memory.
Asking him if musk was the source of the Twitter files isn’t asking him for his confidential sources.
Musk said he is releasing them lol.
That makes her question also so very dumb and the guy going “well it sure sounds like it” gets to do that because of how dumb the approach is
But hey dramatic! Journalists! Sources
Also the whole - did you do it for profit is ridiculous. No lady i work for free 
Debbie washerman Schultz throwing Taibibis own moral high ground in his face was actual the highlight of that. I am not sure why fox kept that in 
“How dare you cherry pick information and provide it so it makes it seem like we are censoring information. Oh also you need to fire a political pundit”
He’s right.
It is amazing how - despite being thoroughly proven wrong about this a few days ago - you’re still vomitting up the same nonsensical talking points.
Amazing, but not at all surprising.
1 Like
Its amazing that you think your inane ramblings proved anything I said wrong.
But…you went to Law School.
