Posted on 11/02/2017 7:26:15 AM PDT by Sir Napsalot
Twitter admits during 2016 election Trump used platform half as much as Clinton but had twice as much success. Additionally, Twitter legal counsel admits to hiding up to 48% of negative Clinton twitter content (hashtag tweets surrounding DNC and Podesta emails), yet suppressed nothing negative about candidate Donald Trump…
During testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sean J. Edgett Acting General Counsel for Twitter, Inc. delivered a 20 page opening statement (full pdf below). Within the statement attorney Edgett shared the protocol for Twitter hiding hashtags they deemed troubling in the lead-up to the 2016 election.
(snip)
However, amid all the examples cited, Twitter did not “hide” any material that was negative toward candidate Donald Trump. In every example cited Twitter only took action to hide user content that was negative toward candidate Hillary Clinton. A remarkable ‘coincidence‘. (emphasis mine)
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
GOPe Swamp creatures and Globalist mega-billionaires, take note.
Obama ‘had a phone and a pen’.
Let’s see how that stand up to Trump’s.
Something like 20-50% of the Trump tweets were hidden.
We saw that over and over. Something would start to trend and if it was anti-Hillary they’d deep six it.
Twitter is evil. They ‘shadowbanned’ stories. All kinds of stunts.
Ironic that Hillary refused to be open to technology. Trump allowed facebook to come into the campaign and used it extensively. Hillary and the DNC looked like doddering old fools.
Wow. This is a big deal.
Think how much Trump would have won by if he wasn’t being hamstrung by the big tech companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google.
Who would have thunk it:
'Under budget and ahead of schedule.
Amazing.
I read during the campaign that it took a committee of seven people to compose a Hillary Clinton tweet. And none of them was named Hillary Clinton.
Hillary and the DNC looked like doddering old fools.
And there’s no one there to replace the DNC old folks once they’re put out to pasture.
Something like 1,000 state house seats flipped when people actually saw what Obama and Democrats stand for. An entire generation of leftist politicians was wiped out in the aftermath.
To me, it just shows how truly disgusting about those NeverTrumpers.
They kept arguing Trump was too negative, could never win, yada yada ..... they never went out into fields and actually listen. Either truly listen to candidate Trump or truly listen to those who supported him and/or went to his rallies. Because they are too smart themselves or something.
These people RATHER have Hillary (who committed treason) Clinton as our president. All I have to say is that I have looooooong memory of who these people are.
To me, it just shows how truly disgusting about those NeverTrumpers.
They kept arguing Trump was too negative, could never win, yada yada ..... they never went out into fields and actually listen. Either truly listen to candidate Trump or truly listen to those who supported him and/or went to his rallies. Because they are too smart themselves or something.
These people RATHER have Hillary (who committed treason) Clinton as our president. All I have to say is that I have looooooong memory of who these people are.
An entire generation of leftist politicians was wiped out in the aftermath.
“Trump allowed facebook to come into the campaign and used it extensively. Hillary and the DNC looked like doddering old fools.”
indeed. and the great irony is 9 years ago, the fake stream media was publishing a tsunami of stories about how Obama and the Dems were light years ahead of the stone age Pubs in the use of IT and social media, and that it would be impossible for the Pubs to every overcome the Dems amazing advantage.
“I read during the campaign that it took a committee of seven people to compose a Hillary Clinton tweet. And none of them was named Hillary Clinton.”
sounds about right ... that’s the way i remember it too.
the book “Shattered” also makes it clear that was the way her speeches were written as well, and the biggest problem her teams of speech writers had was essentially that there was no there, there for Hillary ... she was essentially an empty pantsuit and they never could come up with an overarching vision for her speeches because she had none.
Ping
ditto.
Twitter admits during 2016 election Trump used platform half as much as Clinton but had twice as much success. Additionally, Twitter legal counsel admits to hiding up to 48% of negative Clinton twitter content (hashtag tweets surrounding DNC and Podesta emails), yet suppressed nothing negative about candidate Donald Trump…
Sounds like COLLUSION: secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.
In order for ‘COLLUSION’ charge to stand, you have to show evidence of Google, Facebook, and Twitter Co. actively colluded with Hillary Clinton Camp to suppress anti-Hillary and promote anti-Trump messages.
However, I think in this case, these tech giants simply censored viewpoints on their own.
At most, you can say they are not for free expression.
/Just my not-legal opinion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.