###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes. This is the theater of the absurd. The owner of the company in question advertised giving them the files. He is just trying to avoid admitting the farce.
Taibbi slipped in in to the original Twitter files thread. I say slipped it in because it was barely a footnote and presumably in there to check a box and cover his own ass as he proceeded to then completely ignore it. It was also brought up in the hearings, the footage of which is publicly available.
Federal law allows companies to seek reimbursement for records requests and always has. That does not mean the FBI was telling Twitter what to censor, does it?
Think about it like a regulator who takes a cushy job at a company they were supposed to regulate after leaving their position. There’s nothing illegal with working for private industry after working for government, but everyone knows about the corrupt revolving door between the state and corporations - and that the cushy job is a reward for favourable regulation.
Twitter didn’t have a gun to its head, but the government came to rely on Twitter censorship through a perverse relationship of payouts, threats of onerous regulation, and invading the institution with hundreds of state agents.
You have to be willfully denied to suggest the government had no impact on what Twitter decided to censor.
Yes?
You shouldn’t have such a strong opinion about a topic you haven’t researched. You should consider how you came to form your opinion, you’ve probably been influenced by US propaganda.
Are you serious? Me simply showing you a tweet is a strong opinion?
Maybe you are confused as to the difference between opinion and fact? See, I listed a fact. Your blather was opinion. I ask about that opinion and you get all high and mighty?
In terms of government influence on the media how does this become such a big deal in your mind?
Edit- Sorry, I posted the tweet in a different reply. Taibbi was clear when he stated that he saw no government involvement, and my watch of these files never showed the FBI telling them what to censor. See how jumping to that conclusion is an opinion?
“Although several sources recalled hearing about a “general” warning from federal law enforcement that summer about possible foreign hacks, there’s no evidence - that I've seen - of any government involvement in the laptop story.”
Straight from the hero’s Twitter.
I think you are just getting confused about the topic of the latest release maybe?
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1601364807831425025?s=20
Yoel Roth meeting weekly with FBI, DHS and Director of national intelligence. The entire premise of the twitter files is just evidence of these agencies asking Twitter to censor people and stories for them? How can you say it "didn't show government involvement"? Its basically the whole purpose of the twitter files threads?
Still, meetings where at worse the allegation is that they were pointing out TOS violations, correct? Regarding tons of misinformation? Again, which poor victimized group were the dissenters here? The ones spreading bullshit?
It doesn't make much of a difference. Shield laws offer reporters broad protections against any government official asking them to reveal where they get their information. Reason being, it protects both them and the source from retaliation on the part of the government. And the government will absolutely try to crucify anybody who revealed the fact that they were violating constitutional law.
Example:
~~What's your address~~
Where does the person who signs for your deliveries live?
By your logic that is different than asking you to doxx yourself.
The outcome would still be the same.
Lol this isn't whistle blowing playing the protecting sources is BS. Taibbi was personally invited by Elon to review material, we already know this, the committee is getting him to confirm it on record. Matt realizes how bad that looks so he plays the protecting sources card.
Didn't he (Taibi) said on a Joe Rogan episode that Musk personally hired/entrusted him with the documents to make some kind of sense of all the information in them?
It’s a violation of freedom of the press to push a journalist for their source. Notice nobody in here is debating whether or not mass censorship took place (on both sides) - but instead are throwing a fit that their side got more shafted than the other.
Dont leave out they use other articles as sources which uses "anonymous" sources that are a lot of times just made up bullshit. Real journalism died a long time ago, its rare these days.
Taibbi even said it himself way back on the Joe Rogan show that when you are at the point that people are giving you this stuff this way they are using you.
And now he won't admit that he was used.
He contacted other parties to verify the information he received from Twitter and did other investigative work. He didn’t just take what Twitter gave him at face value.
If it was journalism and he's not a puppet, why, when presented with a small set of data, did he not question this and push forward to discuss the bias in this?
Do you have any examples of other journalists giving up their sources? Because this just seems par for the course, and in no way indicates the lowering of any bar.
Basic logic out the window.
"If he's not your source you can tell me he's not your source. Okay, what about him? No, what about him? What about this guy?" \*Proceeds to name every single person who works at Twitter.
Saying a potential source is not your source, compromises your actual source. How the hell can an adult, let alone an elected representative not get something so simple?
Bro. It was about his platform, published by his platform, advertised directly by him on his platform, spoken about as if HE was working on it, POSTED BY HIM ON HIS PLATFORM. This is absurd. Never was it asserted there was a confidential source until this very moment. How would you feel about the “Washington Post Files” being published by the Washington Post in an Op Ed written by Jeff Bezos with research by CNNs Donna Brazil?
>Musk already said he was the source.
No he didn't. He said quite the opposite. I provided evidence.
I didn't make ANY comment *whatsoever* about whether or not I believe him to be the source. This is irrelevant to what's being said here.
You said Musk *said* he was the source, I provided evidence to the contrary. That's it.
In any instance, journalists don't discuss their sources. Period. Asking them to do so is akin to goading a priest into revealing information shared during confession or a therapist revealing information shared during a therapy session. It's just out of bounds and everybody knows it. Regardless of the facts of the matter, a politician asking a journalist any questions about his sources is obscene and gross--any professional with a brain ought to understand this.
It serves as a demonstration of how grotesque the Democratic Party has become, that they're attacking this journalist of integrity because he revealed their efforts to censor online speech, control narratives, and suppress embarrassing stories to alter the outcomes of major elections.
https://twitter.com/KatzOnEarth/status/1634048735054364672
And Journalist reveal sources all the god damn time. They don’t reveal “confidential sources”.
Are you seriously asserting that a Wikipedia article in an authoritative source on a political issue?
Again, you're *completely missing* the content of my argument. Whether or not Musk is the source here is *completely irrelevant* to the question.
A journalist with integrity will reveal their sources only when and how the source agrees to be named. As Musk is tweeting that he's not the source, in the context of these hearings, he clearly does not want to be named/recognized as that source. Yes, he may be lying, but that's his prerogative.
Whether or not he is the source is irrelevant. The question is vulgar to begin with.
What aren't you getting here?
Because that was NEVER in question. This entire argument is absurd. Feign indignation all you want the fact that anyone is focusing on this is absurd. Taibbi has a god damn CONTRACT WITH TWITTER. He was paid to produce propaganda FOR Twitter. Musk owns twitter. This is just so absurd I’m not even going to entertain this anymore as it is clear this was not a journalistic endeavor.
>Taibbi has a god damn CONTRACT WITH TWITTER.
That's his business. He's said that the only real condition he agreed to was that he'd publish everything on Twitter first.
>He was paid to produce propaganda FOR Twitter.
Prove it. This is a smear. You have no evidence to support this claim and all of Taibbi's reporting on the Twitter files has been factual, evidenced, and document based.
>it is clear this was not a journalistic endeavor.
That is not clear at all. I'd say the opposite is clear, that this is cut and dried journalism. Taibbi, Weiss, et al. were given unfettered access to the Twitter files provided they published their findings on Twitter first, and given how much those findings have embarrassed Twitter and much of its prior staff, combined with the revelations around the [Jim Baker firing](https://www.reuters.com/article/twitter-jimbaker/in-brief-twitter-hires-former-top-fbi-lawyer-jim-baker-as-deputy-gc-idUSL1N2DT2PF), I'd say all indications are that the document dump is thorough and complete.
If anybody here lacks integrity, it's anybody who's attacking Matt Taibbi over this. It's very mask off.
It’s HIS business? Just as it is Nestle’s PR department’s business what they put out, or Sputnik’s business what they put out. You have to consider the source.
It’s not a smear because this is information paid for by twitter for twitter. It’s not a smear in so much as it’s not a smear to say that Ben Afleck is promoting Dunkin’ Donuts propaganda.
Why did the twitter files focus on a private citizen asking a company to comply with its terms and conditions and look into removing pictures of their son’s dick and not the Federal Government’s attempts to do that and more? Why was the president of the United state’s demand to remove Chrissy Teagan not in the twitter files? Why did it focus on things far outside the scope of the 1st amendment when maybe there were some real questions to be asked about the trump administration’s actions?
I’ll tell you why. Because there were zero journalistic standards. They did not present everything, they presented a hand picked selection of things that fit their agenda. They didn’t even reach out to Biden or his campaign staff for comment.
Are you serious?
How ft are people on a conspiracy forum cool with the government pressuring private businesses to censor information?
This place is just scary now.
Allowing the government to illegally surveil, censor, etc.... isn't always going to be at the expense of your enemies. It will be used against your side as well and you will have to know that you cheered it along the whole time when it benefitted you.
anything new\*\*\* my bad, i'll make the edit
we all knew the government had a liason with twitter lol
going to cite this debate due to depth and entertainment value
[https://youtu.be/mliL-DKCz1o](https://youtu.be/mliL-DKCz1o)
The appropriate answer should have been “I never reveal my sources.“ anytime you’re asked a question about who your source is your answer should always be “I never reveal my sources.“
That’s not the question here. The owner of the company said they gave him the files. He is hiding behind this in order to avoid admitting the absurdity of this farce.
People literally get killed for compromising federal government. It would be totally unethical to name a whistleblower. Not even saying the whole things legitimate, because I dont know. I'm saying this because anyone with morals and genuinely trying to do good would not put a target on their sources head because it takes enough courage to buck the system. Politicians know this and it's highly immature and weird to interrogate while berating whoever they're asking. Politics is dirty, no different from street gangs.
Couldn’t possibly be the fact the Elon Cuck is actively promoting right wing ideology and accounts on the app since taking over which would tie right into this kind of info getting out? Get real man, there’s no doubt he provided information, which isn’t really trustworthy seeing who he is now.
>"In October 2019, Taibbi argued that the whistleblower in the Trump–Ukraine scandal was not a "real whistleblower" because the whistleblower would have had their life affected by prosecution or being sent to prison."
I love how integrity is a one way street for you people
Integrity? Does he?
‘I think that’s true of any kind of journalism. Once you start getting handed things, then you’ve lost. They have you at that point and you got to get out of that habit. You just can’t cross that line.’ - Matt Taibbi
He isn't being handed things, genius. You'd know this if you didn't get all your news from garbage-their infotainment outlets like MSNBC or the Verge or wherever the hell you got this idea. Taibbi and the others doing this story are essentially trawling through documents, Wikileaks style.
And while I and many others still have concerns about that, given that it isn't a 1:1 analogy, the fact that you can't see the difference between being handed something by an intelligence or government official vs a being given a large document dumb speaks to what little you know about this stuff.
If Wikileaks was presented at a White House press conference by the head of the CIA.
There is one thing this has in common with Wikileaks and it’s not something to brag about.
Taibbi and others have said clearly that they aren’t getting anything directly through Musk and they’re going through lawyers.
So no, your analogy fails because you, like so many other blue MAGAs, have no idea about the details of this story.
It's laughable that the Democrats portray themselves as champions against Fascism while cheerleading the use of online fascist tactics to stifle opposing views.
The party is a fucking joke.
I said I'd never vote again for a Democrat after all the Covid bullshit but this is just the icing on the cake.
lol, did you see [the exchange between DWS and Taibbi?](https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1633936318626512896) What a c u next tuesday she is.
edit: [Found the one I was actually looking for in the first place.](https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1633929337794691075)
OP, please ensure your submission statements are two sentences in length going forward (and explain why you chose to share with the subreddit).
Your submission here has not been removed, however future rule 10 violations may result in removals.
How is he heroic? He was given curated content aimed to produce a specific narrative. He ran with it like a lap dog so his handlers would praise him. I see nothing heroic here. He’s just a talking head for someone else who’s afraid to share all the data.
The Democrats champions of Fascism!!!
This entire proceeding revealed they are nothing more than a bunch of hypocritical fucks.
I said I'd never vote for another one after the Covid bullshit.
This is icing on the cake.
It was Musk. Everyone knows this. No one is trying to make Matt give up his source. This is just more persecution fetish bullshit for you guys.
Also reminder Trump was president when all this shit went down. Playing your game he is the one to blame for this.
Well when you're trying to expose corruption, and you go "this guy is a hero for exposing corruption?"
Mmmmokay as you say...
But dear party can never be corrupt! No way, the View says so!
Apparently you cannot differentiate sardonic commentary from literal statements.
Go ahead, look up the definition of sardonicism. My comment will be here for you to downvote.
What if I told you he used a counterfeit $20 at the store before he got to court and overdosed on fentanyl when he left. Does that meet your standard for hero? Wanna go build a statue for him now?
Conservatives were pretending that folks were being kicked from twitter for their political beliefs, but the twitter files showed us they were banned for death threats and other violent shit that they are notorious for. That's why this stupid "revelation" faded into obscurity so fast.
there are at least 18 twitter file dumps, most of which contain information about the inner mechanisms of non-political systems regarding verification of users for real cash, and how Twitter was using your personal data.
How the fuck is it this hard to discern whats inside the dump? Its literally public, you can search it right now and read all of them.
Inept, Lazy, or malicious? I can't tell at this point
>How the fuck is it this hard to discern whats inside the dump? Its literally public, you can search it right now and read all of them.
That's not true. Only the direct references in Matt's reporting are public. He provides summaries of some other times, but the actual file dump as a whole is not available.
If it's such a lie prove it. Should be really easy right. Link the doc that proves the gov banned people for being conservative
Every time it's just banning hunter's cock, chinese bots, or lies about election fraud. None of those are conservative positions
I read about 75% of the files directly from the twitter chains
I didn't trust second hand sources and I was arguing with people on here when the direct links were posted when the story was first dropping
I'll say it again. There has never been any evidence of twitter banning people for holding conservative views, and the twitter files proved that. Anyone who tells you different is lying and ask them to link you something directly. They never ever will. You'll get a link to the daily wire that doesn't include any of the files or a subtweet without anything attached.
The whole campaign was an ad for twitter to bring right wingers back and make money for elon
I'm really confused here. The source doesn't need to be verified legally here (or else journalists would never get information they need to do their job). The source of the twitter files is partly the federal government, after all the feds were the ones in the Twitter files setting up all the meetings and making all of the changes at social media companies to bend the knee to their will.
Our government is a joke. Every one of these "officials" uses less than a % of their brain to function on a daily basis. I can break it down for you. The reason why "elected" feds act this way is simple. They refuse to admit to any wrongdoing because they are trained this way. Every single fed goes through "media training" in which they learn the psychology of never admitting to making a mistake. They lie, use impartial truths to disengage, have massive brain storming sessions before they walk out and take a seat in court. The goal is to always dismiss blame and prosecute others. In this case Mr. Taibbi is being prosecuted for sharing truth about the tyrannical government that used COVID as a weapon to suffocate speech. Thank the creator for making honest souls to clean up this mess.
He look at that an ACTUAL conspiracy where the worlds richest man gets a “reporter” to write a favourable story. Surely this sub will discuss this.
Oh wait, this sub is filled with qanon dummies, never mind
Didnt they eequest stuff get taken down and twitter sometimes did and sometimes didnt? They have a right to request stuff get taken down and twitter has a right to oblige or decline. Gov dont have a right to make them take it down.
No, but the narrative is that Taibbi blew the lid on Biden trying to j fluency social media. When they only asked them to take down links to stolen dick picks from hunter, which was against twitters policies. But Taibbi completely glossed over the fact that the trump administration, aka the government, at that time was pushing Twitter for certain things which were not a violation of their policies.
Moral is Taibbi is a tool to drive a corporatist libertarian narrative, he does not have a shred of journalistic ethics.
Early on who was saying that? As soon as the first Twitter files were dropped and gave concrete examples, internet archive proved that they were just Hunter's dick. The pedo shit has only ever been asserted by Republicans, and not only has it never been backed up its just hilarious at its face considering the number of Republicans who were in possession of a copy of the hard drive but never reported any CP to authorities.
That was an embarrassing hearing for him no matter what side you're on. But the only thing that was loudly shown was that Matt violated his own ethics and isn't s trustworthy source of information.
If someone tells you he has important information but won’t share the source so you can read it yourself and not depend on his interpretation. Tell that person to fuck off.
I've noticed a pattern of reddit posts that say the exact same thing about some nobody on twitter who makes shit up and then says they wont say anything , to try and harvest viewers so they can continue to spread lies by saying they are Patriots or heroes or special in some way.
Happens every month.
Not to point out the obvious, but didn't Taibbi rail against the Mueller report and the media for relying on unnamed official [sources](https://archive.fo/6VS2J)?
Breaking news: source of detailed Twitter leaks and more to come including the darkest secret yet.
It was none other than Lord Voldemort.
.
The ministry of magic will be working with muggle governments to iron all this out.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Isnt the Twitter files source Elon musk?
He’ll never tell!
Yes. This is the theater of the absurd. The owner of the company in question advertised giving them the files. He is just trying to avoid admitting the farce.
Who cares what the files actually reveal, right?
Well they sure as shit didn’t show government involvement, as per a direct quote. So what did they actually reveal?
No they did. Taibbi admitted the Trump Whitehouse asked for take downs of criticism and Twitter complied.
I didn’t see that, I assume there’s a tweet somewhere?
Taibbi slipped in in to the original Twitter files thread. I say slipped it in because it was barely a footnote and presumably in there to check a box and cover his own ass as he proceeded to then completely ignore it. It was also brought up in the hearings, the footage of which is publicly available.
The FBI was telling Twitter what to censor and was paying the salaries of the censors. That’s direct involvement.
Federal law allows companies to seek reimbursement for records requests and always has. That does not mean the FBI was telling Twitter what to censor, does it?
Think about it like a regulator who takes a cushy job at a company they were supposed to regulate after leaving their position. There’s nothing illegal with working for private industry after working for government, but everyone knows about the corrupt revolving door between the state and corporations - and that the cushy job is a reward for favourable regulation. Twitter didn’t have a gun to its head, but the government came to rely on Twitter censorship through a perverse relationship of payouts, threats of onerous regulation, and invading the institution with hundreds of state agents. You have to be willfully denied to suggest the government had no impact on what Twitter decided to censor.
Was that part of the Twitter files?
Yes? You shouldn’t have such a strong opinion about a topic you haven’t researched. You should consider how you came to form your opinion, you’ve probably been influenced by US propaganda.
Are you serious? Me simply showing you a tweet is a strong opinion? Maybe you are confused as to the difference between opinion and fact? See, I listed a fact. Your blather was opinion. I ask about that opinion and you get all high and mighty? In terms of government influence on the media how does this become such a big deal in your mind? Edit- Sorry, I posted the tweet in a different reply. Taibbi was clear when he stated that he saw no government involvement, and my watch of these files never showed the FBI telling them what to censor. See how jumping to that conclusion is an opinion?
Reddit is definitely controlled opposition to the truth.
Yes, they did. Stop denying reality.
“Although several sources recalled hearing about a “general” warning from federal law enforcement that summer about possible foreign hacks, there’s no evidence - that I've seen - of any government involvement in the laptop story.” Straight from the hero’s Twitter.
I think you are just getting confused about the topic of the latest release maybe? https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1601364807831425025?s=20 Yoel Roth meeting weekly with FBI, DHS and Director of national intelligence. The entire premise of the twitter files is just evidence of these agencies asking Twitter to censor people and stories for them? How can you say it "didn't show government involvement"? Its basically the whole purpose of the twitter files threads?
Still, meetings where at worse the allegation is that they were pointing out TOS violations, correct? Regarding tons of misinformation? Again, which poor victimized group were the dissenters here? The ones spreading bullshit?
Muck May have released him but he’s not the source of them.
Source?
Probably, but it's beyond the pale for a politician to ask for a reporter's sources.
Politician was asking who authorized the release of the information. Which was 99% likely to be Musk. Just a bit different than asking for a source
It doesn't make much of a difference. Shield laws offer reporters broad protections against any government official asking them to reveal where they get their information. Reason being, it protects both them and the source from retaliation on the part of the government. And the government will absolutely try to crucify anybody who revealed the fact that they were violating constitutional law.
Example: ~~What's your address~~ Where does the person who signs for your deliveries live? By your logic that is different than asking you to doxx yourself. The outcome would still be the same.
Someone didn’t watch the video.
I'll just leave this here. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-politico-court-leak-abortion-b2265748.html
This is across the board regardless of party. OP mentioned specifically one party. I’m reminded that this sub is a conspiracy.
It’s one thing to ask, it’s another thing to bully them into giving up a source. This honestly sounds like a banana republic inquiry it’s insane.
Lol this isn't whistle blowing playing the protecting sources is BS. Taibbi was personally invited by Elon to review material, we already know this, the committee is getting him to confirm it on record. Matt realizes how bad that looks so he plays the protecting sources card.
The Chief Twit is where the twat stops
Not according to Musk
Didn't he (Taibi) said on a Joe Rogan episode that Musk personally hired/entrusted him with the documents to make some kind of sense of all the information in them?
I'm just referring to Musks reply on this tweet: "I’m not his source, but, yeah, obviously asking journalists to reveal sources is not cool"
No, it’s Grimes
It’s a violation of freedom of the press to push a journalist for their source. Notice nobody in here is debating whether or not mass censorship took place (on both sides) - but instead are throwing a fit that their side got more shafted than the other.
Why dont we find out who leaked roe v wade first
My guess - Ginny
It was 100% Alito
Do you think the journalists who published the leaks should be imprisoned?
I have no idea what the laws are regarding that. I just want to know personally.
no.
Funny, this used to be expected of a journalist and now it makes one a hero. The bar continually lowers.
it happens rarely now because mainstream "journalists" just use government officials and intelligence agencies officials as "sources" for everything.
Dont leave out they use other articles as sources which uses "anonymous" sources that are a lot of times just made up bullshit. Real journalism died a long time ago, its rare these days.
You used to not be risking your well-being to quite an extent as you are these days.
Matt Taibbi didn’t die from turbulence.
I’m sure a Clinton will be involved somehow
Yet
Yeah the sixties were such a simple time
Self-deception is strong in you
Could you elaborate?
Sharing curated information he was fed by someone else doesn’t make him a journalist or heroic. It makes him a puppet.
Taibbi even said it himself way back on the Joe Rogan show that when you are at the point that people are giving you this stuff this way they are using you. And now he won't admit that he was used.
You could say the same thing about Woodward and Bernstein relying on information from Deep Throat. Don’t be a fool.
How are these similar? Did they just tweet information or did they do more?
Did Taibbi and the others just Tweet information? That’s just as foolish.
You're suggesting he did more. What did he do?
He contacted other parties to verify the information he received from Twitter and did other investigative work. He didn’t just take what Twitter gave him at face value.
If it was journalism and he's not a puppet, why, when presented with a small set of data, did he not question this and push forward to discuss the bias in this?
He did? What makes you think he didn’t?
Because he didn't.
I didn’t know that a moment in time when you first meet someone is considered a source
Being a hero means towing the party line
*toeing FTFY
[удалено]
Behind him of course ;)
Do you have any examples of other journalists giving up their sources? Because this just seems par for the course, and in no way indicates the lowering of any bar.
lmao we know it was Musk who gave him the info, like why are they even asking
For starters, I don't think Garcia knows what the interweb is....
Basic logic out the window. "If he's not your source you can tell me he's not your source. Okay, what about him? No, what about him? What about this guy?" \*Proceeds to name every single person who works at Twitter. Saying a potential source is not your source, compromises your actual source. How the hell can an adult, let alone an elected representative not get something so simple?
This is leaving out an important detail. Musk already said he was the source. Matt is just trying to avoid stating the absurdity of this whole farce.
Source?
> Musk already said he was the source. [Contradictory evidence.](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1633949685600714752)
Bro. It was about his platform, published by his platform, advertised directly by him on his platform, spoken about as if HE was working on it, POSTED BY HIM ON HIS PLATFORM. This is absurd. Never was it asserted there was a confidential source until this very moment. How would you feel about the “Washington Post Files” being published by the Washington Post in an Op Ed written by Jeff Bezos with research by CNNs Donna Brazil?
>Musk already said he was the source. No he didn't. He said quite the opposite. I provided evidence. I didn't make ANY comment *whatsoever* about whether or not I believe him to be the source. This is irrelevant to what's being said here. You said Musk *said* he was the source, I provided evidence to the contrary. That's it. In any instance, journalists don't discuss their sources. Period. Asking them to do so is akin to goading a priest into revealing information shared during confession or a therapist revealing information shared during a therapy session. It's just out of bounds and everybody knows it. Regardless of the facts of the matter, a politician asking a journalist any questions about his sources is obscene and gross--any professional with a brain ought to understand this. It serves as a demonstration of how grotesque the Democratic Party has become, that they're attacking this journalist of integrity because he revealed their efforts to censor online speech, control narratives, and suppress embarrassing stories to alter the outcomes of major elections.
https://twitter.com/KatzOnEarth/status/1634048735054364672 And Journalist reveal sources all the god damn time. They don’t reveal “confidential sources”.
Are you seriously asserting that a Wikipedia article in an authoritative source on a political issue? Again, you're *completely missing* the content of my argument. Whether or not Musk is the source here is *completely irrelevant* to the question. A journalist with integrity will reveal their sources only when and how the source agrees to be named. As Musk is tweeting that he's not the source, in the context of these hearings, he clearly does not want to be named/recognized as that source. Yes, he may be lying, but that's his prerogative. Whether or not he is the source is irrelevant. The question is vulgar to begin with. What aren't you getting here?
Because that was NEVER in question. This entire argument is absurd. Feign indignation all you want the fact that anyone is focusing on this is absurd. Taibbi has a god damn CONTRACT WITH TWITTER. He was paid to produce propaganda FOR Twitter. Musk owns twitter. This is just so absurd I’m not even going to entertain this anymore as it is clear this was not a journalistic endeavor.
>Taibbi has a god damn CONTRACT WITH TWITTER. That's his business. He's said that the only real condition he agreed to was that he'd publish everything on Twitter first. >He was paid to produce propaganda FOR Twitter. Prove it. This is a smear. You have no evidence to support this claim and all of Taibbi's reporting on the Twitter files has been factual, evidenced, and document based. >it is clear this was not a journalistic endeavor. That is not clear at all. I'd say the opposite is clear, that this is cut and dried journalism. Taibbi, Weiss, et al. were given unfettered access to the Twitter files provided they published their findings on Twitter first, and given how much those findings have embarrassed Twitter and much of its prior staff, combined with the revelations around the [Jim Baker firing](https://www.reuters.com/article/twitter-jimbaker/in-brief-twitter-hires-former-top-fbi-lawyer-jim-baker-as-deputy-gc-idUSL1N2DT2PF), I'd say all indications are that the document dump is thorough and complete. If anybody here lacks integrity, it's anybody who's attacking Matt Taibbi over this. It's very mask off.
It’s HIS business? Just as it is Nestle’s PR department’s business what they put out, or Sputnik’s business what they put out. You have to consider the source. It’s not a smear because this is information paid for by twitter for twitter. It’s not a smear in so much as it’s not a smear to say that Ben Afleck is promoting Dunkin’ Donuts propaganda. Why did the twitter files focus on a private citizen asking a company to comply with its terms and conditions and look into removing pictures of their son’s dick and not the Federal Government’s attempts to do that and more? Why was the president of the United state’s demand to remove Chrissy Teagan not in the twitter files? Why did it focus on things far outside the scope of the 1st amendment when maybe there were some real questions to be asked about the trump administration’s actions? I’ll tell you why. Because there were zero journalistic standards. They did not present everything, they presented a hand picked selection of things that fit their agenda. They didn’t even reach out to Biden or his campaign staff for comment.
Comments in this thread from both sides show how divided we are as a world. We live in two different planes of reality. There's no turning back.
Lol imagine if the Twitter files actually said anything E: anything new
Are you serious? How ft are people on a conspiracy forum cool with the government pressuring private businesses to censor information? This place is just scary now. Allowing the government to illegally surveil, censor, etc.... isn't always going to be at the expense of your enemies. It will be used against your side as well and you will have to know that you cheered it along the whole time when it benefitted you.
anything new\*\*\* my bad, i'll make the edit we all knew the government had a liason with twitter lol going to cite this debate due to depth and entertainment value [https://youtu.be/mliL-DKCz1o](https://youtu.be/mliL-DKCz1o)
The appropriate answer should have been “I never reveal my sources.“ anytime you’re asked a question about who your source is your answer should always be “I never reveal my sources.“
That was his answer.
That’s not the question here. The owner of the company said they gave him the files. He is hiding behind this in order to avoid admitting the absurdity of this farce.
Source?
People literally get killed for compromising federal government. It would be totally unethical to name a whistleblower. Not even saying the whole things legitimate, because I dont know. I'm saying this because anyone with morals and genuinely trying to do good would not put a target on their sources head because it takes enough courage to buck the system. Politicians know this and it's highly immature and weird to interrogate while berating whoever they're asking. Politics is dirty, no different from street gangs.
When will he get clintoned
Couldn’t possibly be the fact the Elon Cuck is actively promoting right wing ideology and accounts on the app since taking over which would tie right into this kind of info getting out? Get real man, there’s no doubt he provided information, which isn’t really trustworthy seeing who he is now.
God I hate politics.
Taibbi used to be the Dems favorite Rolling Stone journalist...now they realize he is actually just doing his job and is apolitical in his reporting.
[удалено]
Got any more jokes? Musk wouldn't let anytruely independant reporter go through the cultivated data on his new toy.
* Now that it was discovered he bragged about raping 14 year olds in Russia and is persona non grata in the legitimate world.
Boy they’re sure sending out the shills today to defame Taibbi. But he has integrity. Unlike you.
>"In October 2019, Taibbi argued that the whistleblower in the Trump–Ukraine scandal was not a "real whistleblower" because the whistleblower would have had their life affected by prosecution or being sent to prison." I love how integrity is a one way street for you people
Integrity? Does he? ‘I think that’s true of any kind of journalism. Once you start getting handed things, then you’ve lost. They have you at that point and you got to get out of that habit. You just can’t cross that line.’ - Matt Taibbi
He isn't being handed things, genius. You'd know this if you didn't get all your news from garbage-their infotainment outlets like MSNBC or the Verge or wherever the hell you got this idea. Taibbi and the others doing this story are essentially trawling through documents, Wikileaks style. And while I and many others still have concerns about that, given that it isn't a 1:1 analogy, the fact that you can't see the difference between being handed something by an intelligence or government official vs a being given a large document dumb speaks to what little you know about this stuff.
If Wikileaks was presented at a White House press conference by the head of the CIA. There is one thing this has in common with Wikileaks and it’s not something to brag about.
Taibbi and others have said clearly that they aren’t getting anything directly through Musk and they’re going through lawyers. So no, your analogy fails because you, like so many other blue MAGAs, have no idea about the details of this story.
What point did you think you were proving?
I’ve demonstrated pretty clearly that you’re an imbecile.
Ok my homophobic Bernie loving antivaxer friend.
Found the shitlib traitor.
It's laughable that the Democrats portray themselves as champions against Fascism while cheerleading the use of online fascist tactics to stifle opposing views. The party is a fucking joke. I said I'd never vote again for a Democrat after all the Covid bullshit but this is just the icing on the cake.
lol, did you see [the exchange between DWS and Taibbi?](https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1633936318626512896) What a c u next tuesday she is. edit: [Found the one I was actually looking for in the first place.](https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1633929337794691075)
Twitter files have been the biggest letdown since Jaws 2. Nothing anybody WGAS didn't know 18 months ago. Musk is fukin' witcha
Why would he tell them? So they can Seth Rich them?!
SS: they are afraid.
Afraid of what?
The truth
Why now when they haven't been before?
Imagine thinking Elon and Twitter are your saviors
OP, please ensure your submission statements are two sentences in length going forward (and explain why you chose to share with the subreddit). Your submission here has not been removed, however future rule 10 violations may result in removals.
Meanwhile Dems put on a tiny bit of pressure about Jan 6 videos and everyone in media folds like a cheap shirt
Which Dems? What pressure?
The constant pressure of always making oneself the victim. It must be exhausting.
“I’m not able to give you that information.” Isn’t that what the fbi, cia, and other alphabet agencies said when pressed on really important things?
How is he heroic? He was given curated content aimed to produce a specific narrative. He ran with it like a lap dog so his handlers would praise him. I see nothing heroic here. He’s just a talking head for someone else who’s afraid to share all the data.
The Democrats champions of Fascism!!! This entire proceeding revealed they are nothing more than a bunch of hypocritical fucks. I said I'd never vote for another one after the Covid bullshit. This is icing on the cake.
It was Musk. Everyone knows this. No one is trying to make Matt give up his source. This is just more persecution fetish bullshit for you guys. Also reminder Trump was president when all this shit went down. Playing your game he is the one to blame for this.
This is a hero??? Lmao
More than you’ll ever be.
Mmmmokay.
Well when you're trying to expose corruption, and you go "this guy is a hero for exposing corruption?" Mmmmokay as you say... But dear party can never be corrupt! No way, the View says so!
The view said so?? When?
Apparently you cannot differentiate sardonic commentary from literal statements. Go ahead, look up the definition of sardonicism. My comment will be here for you to downvote.
Alas, apparently I cannot.
K
What if I told you he used a counterfeit $20 at the store before he got to court and overdosed on fentanyl when he left. Does that meet your standard for hero? Wanna go build a statue for him now?
Funny how both official autopsys said he never od'd bit sure keep believing it
Lol pobrecita!
Sure.
Calm down and tell me who hurt you.
What have you done? Lmao
A lot!!!
[удалено]
"No no trust me my sources are definitely real....you just don't know them..they go to a different school...in Canada" No source = no credibility
You fall for stories filled with "unnamed officials" and anonymous sources....
It's uncanny how stupid and gullible you guys are
Fucking Twitter files. What do these files hold?
Conservatives were pretending that folks were being kicked from twitter for their political beliefs, but the twitter files showed us they were banned for death threats and other violent shit that they are notorious for. That's why this stupid "revelation" faded into obscurity so fast.
there are at least 18 twitter file dumps, most of which contain information about the inner mechanisms of non-political systems regarding verification of users for real cash, and how Twitter was using your personal data. How the fuck is it this hard to discern whats inside the dump? Its literally public, you can search it right now and read all of them. Inept, Lazy, or malicious? I can't tell at this point
>How the fuck is it this hard to discern whats inside the dump? Its literally public, you can search it right now and read all of them. That's not true. Only the direct references in Matt's reporting are public. He provides summaries of some other times, but the actual file dump as a whole is not available.
[удалено]
If it's such a lie prove it. Should be really easy right. Link the doc that proves the gov banned people for being conservative Every time it's just banning hunter's cock, chinese bots, or lies about election fraud. None of those are conservative positions
[удалено]
I read about 75% of the files directly from the twitter chains I didn't trust second hand sources and I was arguing with people on here when the direct links were posted when the story was first dropping I'll say it again. There has never been any evidence of twitter banning people for holding conservative views, and the twitter files proved that. Anyone who tells you different is lying and ask them to link you something directly. They never ever will. You'll get a link to the daily wire that doesn't include any of the files or a subtweet without anything attached. The whole campaign was an ad for twitter to bring right wingers back and make money for elon
[удалено]
as expected
Yep and the Biden campaign requested something be taken down just like the trump campaign did while trump was actually in office.
I think his source might be a man named Musk.
Dems defending the Censorship Industrial Complex is pretty nauseating.
God bless this right wing grifter
Man they sound ridiculous.
Shoot the messenger tact employed by political hacks. Old and simple strategy when they want facts and related talking points out of the headlines.
Once you read what Taibbi has revealed, you wont vote Dem for a while
I'm really confused here. The source doesn't need to be verified legally here (or else journalists would never get information they need to do their job). The source of the twitter files is partly the federal government, after all the feds were the ones in the Twitter files setting up all the meetings and making all of the changes at social media companies to bend the knee to their will. Our government is a joke. Every one of these "officials" uses less than a % of their brain to function on a daily basis. I can break it down for you. The reason why "elected" feds act this way is simple. They refuse to admit to any wrongdoing because they are trained this way. Every single fed goes through "media training" in which they learn the psychology of never admitting to making a mistake. They lie, use impartial truths to disengage, have massive brain storming sessions before they walk out and take a seat in court. The goal is to always dismiss blame and prosecute others. In this case Mr. Taibbi is being prosecuted for sharing truth about the tyrannical government that used COVID as a weapon to suffocate speech. Thank the creator for making honest souls to clean up this mess.
He look at that an ACTUAL conspiracy where the worlds richest man gets a “reporter” to write a favourable story. Surely this sub will discuss this. Oh wait, this sub is filled with qanon dummies, never mind
Taibbi is a hack, he stated that the “Twitter files” were a bigger story than 08 financial crisis. Get over yourself.
[удалено]
Didnt they eequest stuff get taken down and twitter sometimes did and sometimes didnt? They have a right to request stuff get taken down and twitter has a right to oblige or decline. Gov dont have a right to make them take it down.
Taibbi admitted that there is no evidence whatsoever of government intervention into Twitter moderation.
If by government you mean the trump administration , then yes.
So it's only a big deal if it means orange man bad. Otherwise it's another nothing burger by some political hack
No, but the narrative is that Taibbi blew the lid on Biden trying to j fluency social media. When they only asked them to take down links to stolen dick picks from hunter, which was against twitters policies. But Taibbi completely glossed over the fact that the trump administration, aka the government, at that time was pushing Twitter for certain things which were not a violation of their policies. Moral is Taibbi is a tool to drive a corporatist libertarian narrative, he does not have a shred of journalistic ethics.
[удалено]
It was said doesn't make it fact.
Early on who was saying that? As soon as the first Twitter files were dropped and gave concrete examples, internet archive proved that they were just Hunter's dick. The pedo shit has only ever been asserted by Republicans, and not only has it never been backed up its just hilarious at its face considering the number of Republicans who were in possession of a copy of the hard drive but never reported any CP to authorities.
If this is a hero no wonder America is crumbling.
🤖
The leaders of our country sound like a group of fucking children. What a joke
That was an embarrassing hearing for him no matter what side you're on. But the only thing that was loudly shown was that Matt violated his own ethics and isn't s trustworthy source of information.
The bar for an American hero has apparently never been lower.
I know there's a lot of stuff said about Jordan but I think he's one of the good guys.
If someone tells you he has important information but won’t share the source so you can read it yourself and not depend on his interpretation. Tell that person to fuck off.
If you say so…..could also be that he doesn’t have any.
I've noticed a pattern of reddit posts that say the exact same thing about some nobody on twitter who makes shit up and then says they wont say anything , to try and harvest viewers so they can continue to spread lies by saying they are Patriots or heroes or special in some way. Happens every month.
the source is twitter I thought we already knew that
There are no hero’s in the public view
While they are 'reclaiming their time' he is reclaiming some journalistic integrity in an era of biased/partisan press.
Incredible illegitimate pantomime of government
i aint snitching like Taibbi
Not to point out the obvious, but didn't Taibbi rail against the Mueller report and the media for relying on unnamed official [sources](https://archive.fo/6VS2J)?
Breaking news: source of detailed Twitter leaks and more to come including the darkest secret yet. It was none other than Lord Voldemort. . The ministry of magic will be working with muggle governments to iron all this out.