Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Twitter Social Networks United States

Senate To Subpoena Twitter CEO Over Blocking of Disputed Biden Articles (wsj.com) 580

The Senate Judiciary Committee plans to issue a subpoena on Tuesday to Twitter Chief Executive Jack Dorsey after the social-media company blocked a pair of New York Post articles that made new allegations about Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, which his campaign has denied. From a report: The subpoena would require the Twitter executive to testify on Oct. 23 before the committee, according to the Republicans who announced the hearing. GOP lawmakers are singling out Twitter because it prevented users from posting links to the articles, which the Post said were based on email exchanges with Hunter Biden, the Democratic candidate's son, provided by allies of President Trump. Those people in turn said they received them from a computer-repair person who found them on a laptop, according to the Post.

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

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Senate To Subpoena Twitter CEO Over Blocking of Disputed Biden Articles

Comments Filter:
  • by mabu ( 178417 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @11:57AM (#60610526)

    Ted Cruz says it's, "election interference" not allowing them to spread bullshit lies that will affect the outcome of the election?

    Reminds me of how Net Neutrality to them, goes against the First Amendment.

    • by BrainJunkie ( 6219718 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:00PM (#60610554)
      Q: How do you know they are lies?

      A: Because Twitter doesn't allow lies to be published!
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        The only news outlet running the story is a tabloid and the "smoking gun" is an invitation that was sent to Hunter Biden. No evidence of any meetings or cash exchanges, just an email invitation.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by Entrope ( 68843 )

          Where do you get your awful talking points? The email was an invitation, yes, but to a follow-up meeting. It explicitly thanked Hunter for a meeting with Hunter's father. That is what reasonable people call "evidence" of that meeting.

          "Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent some time together. Itâ(TM)s realty an honor and pleasure." (Emphasis added, errors in the original.)

          • "Thank you for the invitation and the opportunity to meet your father"... OK so where is the proof that they met? Because from what i'm seeing is the invitation is an opportunity to meet does not mean they met. So where is the proof of the meeting? You know like we have proof of Don Jr's meeting with Russian agents and Don Jr's email saying "i love it" regarding getting dirt from foreign adversary agents.
        • by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:15PM (#60610642)
          If real, that email invitation came from a guy interested in influencing US policy in Ukraine by contacting an American citizen serving on the board of a Ukrainian company and asking him to lobby on behalf of that Ukrainian entity or to facilitate such lobbying.

          So far, that's par for the course in international business. Where it starts to stink is when we discover that that American citizen was the son of the sitting vice president who appeared to have received that appointment to the board solely by virtue of being the son of the vice president.

          That kind of nepotism looks awkward when the policy of the United States in Ukraine was "anti-corruption." And it looks even more awkward when Joe Biden claims he has had no discussions with Hunter re Ukraine but here is a claim and putative evidence that that was simply a lie.

          Joe really looked pathetic during the debate when he said he was proud of Hunter for kicking his drug habit. I really mean that. I felt bad for the guy that he was either believing his son's lies or felt like he had to lie to himself in front of a TV audience like that. And in either case, I just felt like he'd kill for his surviving son.

          And while I may empathize with the guy's loyalty and love for his screw up kid, it sure looks like it blinds him to impropriety and possibly criminality. So where else does he put his blind spots?

          With Trump, he can't make a move without an eager press investigating all sorts of potentially nefarious motives. With Biden, just like Obama, they're not going to say anything bad about him while he's in office, and possibly after. So what kind of graft and incompetence would we let in with a Biden administration?
          • by orlanz ( 882574 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:24PM (#60610722)

            So what kind of graft and incompetence would we let in with a Biden administration?

            I say this as a Republican... better than what we got with Trump.

            You are comparing someone who had to work across the fence with a Republican majority for 6 years vs a guy who can't even get stuff done with all branches under his full control for 2 years and mostly under control for 2 more.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by rogoshen1 ( 2922505 )

              considering biden's platform; if he wins i hope he gets nothing done.

              but really, he's just a trojan horse to get kamala in office. with her, they'll bring in the wonderful super left stuff that made Sanders unelectable; all under the guise of a milquetoast kindly old gentleman (until you piss him off) who's done nothing other than ride his boss's coattails for 8 years as VP.

              And hey, they'll also make it a defacto single party state:

              >increase immigration (aka steady stream of blue voters)
              >pack the sup

          • You'll find plenty of examples of it everywhere. This one's only an issue because Biden's running against Trump.

            This is a transparent attempt to create a Hilary's Emails style October Surprise. And this time the media isn't biting. Nobody is.

            I don't care if Biden's son got a little boost from his daddy-o and you shouldn't either. You should care about whether Biden or Trump is going to do a better job running the company.

            Joe Biden worked with Obama and multiple epidemiologists to create a "Pande
          • by smooth wombat ( 796938 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:42PM (#60610856) Journal
            That kind of nepotism looks awkward when the policy of the United States in Ukraine was "anti-corruption."

            Absolutely. It's not like the con artist has appointed his daughter or son-in-law to government positions, or family members of other staff are miraculously appointed/hired to positions in the government, or had one of his closest allies meet with a foreign agent [go.com] to dig up dirt on an opponent.

            Because the con artist is all about anti-corruption.
        • by sinij ( 911942 )
          No, the email was not an invitation, but follow up thanking for introductions. Something you would send after meeting took place. Also, emails isn't the only evidence - the fact that Hunter Biden was paid HUGE salary without ever contributing anything else is the other part you choose to ignore. You also choose to ignore that Biden had Ukrainian prosecutor fired, supposedly on corruption pretext.

          Here is the full picture: Emails showing meeting took place. Money exchanged hands to facilitate meeting. Biden
          • by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:44PM (#60610888) Homepage Journal

            No, the email was not an invitation, but follow up thanking for introductions. Something you would send after meeting took place. Also, emails isn't the only evidence - the fact that Hunter Biden was paid HUGE salary without ever contributing anything else is the other part you choose to ignore.

            And this differs from every other exec in every other company how?

            I'm really serious. People are on boards because companies have to have a certain number of people on the boards, not necessarily because they possess any special abilities or will contribute any particular thing to the board. Far from demonstrating obvious corruption, you've pretty much demonstrated that him being on the board is entirely normal. The only people who will be fooled by your claims are people who have never seen how people at that level of an organization are chosen.

            Besides, it's entirely untrue that he didn't contribute anything. He is a lawyer. A lawyer with knowledge of U.S. law serving on the board of a company that frequently deals with the U.S. is contributing to the company by helping them avoid crossing any legal lines that could get them into trouble. The fact that you can't see that as a contribution tells me that you're completely blinded by politics and are desperately looking for a reason to hate VP Biden so that you will feel better about your decision to instead vote for a massively corrupt, grossly incompetent failed businessman whose reckless disregard for the truth has cost hundreds of thousands of Americans their lives.

            • by sinij ( 911942 )

              No, the email was not an invitation, but follow up thanking for introductions. Something you would send after meeting took place. Also, emails isn't the only evidence - the fact that Hunter Biden was paid HUGE salary without ever contributing anything else is the other part you choose to ignore.

              And this differs from every other exec in every other company how?

              Having a Vice President father doing your bidding is the corruption, not being a worthless board member while collecting the salary.

              • by sinij ( 911942 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:53PM (#60610960)
                This would have been 100% non-story if not for the fact that VP Biden had Ukrainian prosecutor fired. We gave Biden benefit of the doubt by accepting his explanation that his intent was to fight corruption. Now these emails, while circumstantial, remove that doubt. We now can be certain why Biden chose to exercise his VP power to get that prosecutor fired. This doesn't mean that prosecutor was not corrupt but it does mean that VP Biden's stated and actual reasons were not the same.
        • The only news outlet running the story is a tabloid and the "smoking gun" is an invitation that was sent to Hunter Biden. No evidence of any meetings or cash exchanges, just an email invitation.

          Like that matters.. This is political man.. It's about appearances as all October Surprises are.

          Biden will be forced to "explain" this against his categorical denials of his past. As the saying goes, "If you are explaining, you are losing".

          The funny part (for me anyway) is how Twitter's attempt to do damage control on this has backfired, elevating this above the fold on the front page, when it was really some "also ran" filler story buried in the back of the politics section. It's at a point now that the

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Ly4 ( 2353328 )

        How do you know they are lies?

        a) Because I read the story. It's garbage.

        b) Because I looked at the sources. Giuliani, the NY Post, and the psycho repair shop owner (who thinks Hilary Clinton is out to kill him) are completely untrustworthy.

        • by stabiesoft ( 733417 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:12PM (#60610622) Homepage
          Ah, but faux news has it plastered all over its front page. Unsurprisingly I saw nothing about the GOP dropping illegal ballot boxes in California, even with a C&D letter from the AG. As opposed to the GOP in TX forcing legitimate drop boxes to be removed in blue counties that were staffed by county clerk employees. Also nowhere on faux news front page. The GOP is just gone crazy. dump trump and lets go back to trumplessness.
        • No, the source is the documentary evidence from Hunter Biden's own laptop computer. All the others are just conveyors of it.
        • by Kohath ( 38547 )

          Twitter says the info is from a "hack". Are you saying the info is fabricated and not from a hack? Which is it?

        • The assumption is they didn't have the emails. That doesn't mean the emails are authentic or relevant or anything. But you can't say that a prior conclusion based on available evidence refutes new evidence. That's begging the question.

    • Ministry of Truth (Score:4, Insightful)

      by mi ( 197448 ) <slashdot-2017q4@virtual-estates.net> on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:05PM (#60610582) Homepage Journal

      not allowing them to spread bullshit lies

      First Amendment protects the "bullshit lies" too... It does not legally apply to Twitter, but the same reasons we don't allow the government to police speech applies to social media companies.

      You're aching for a Ministry of Truth, but we don't have such an agency — even if Twitter/Facebook are trying to become one.

      If it really is such a "bullshit lie", why block it? The Democratic voters — enlightened superior beings all — will see through it, their voting decision unaffected. What's the worry?

      • by cpt kangarooski ( 3773 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:13PM (#60610628) Homepage

        First Amendment protects the "bullshit lies" too... It does not legally apply to Twitter, but the same reasons we don't allow the government to police speech applies to social media companies.

        No, the reasons don't apply to private entities at all. Quite the opposite: private persons and entities have the right to exercise their own editorial discretion. The First Amendment doesn't privilege one private party over another. But it does provide each individual with the right to both choose to speak free of government interference and to choose to not speak free of government interference. This is inclusive of whether to repeat the speech of another and whether to allow oneself to be a conduit for the speech of another.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • they are worried about the soft squishy middle for which all this stuff is new information..

        They KNOW that this election is razor close (despite what the polling is claiming) and that a couple thousand votes may make all the difference in the right state. So such a story being introduced is enough to make a difference.

      • Libel is a thing. Also I can't advertise outright lies. I can't tell you my soap cures cancer.

        Also this isn't a first amendment issue. I don't know how to tell you this but despite what Qannon told you Twitter is not the government, and is not (and this is key) run by a global illuminati of Lizard People. They are in fact a private company, and can make decisions about what content to allow on their privately owned website all by themselves.

        You can too. Feel free to start your own Twitter competitor
        • Libel is a thing. Also I can't advertise outright lies. I can't tell you my soap cures cancer.

          Also this isn't a first amendment issue. I don't know how to tell you this but despite what Qannon told you Twitter is not the government, and is not (and this is key) run by a global illuminati of Lizard People. They are in fact a private company, and can make decisions about what content to allow on their privately owned website all by themselves.

          Twitter is not the government but they are protected under S230 by the government. They could lose that protection.

    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      by sinij ( 911942 )
      Clearly, only Democrats should be allowed to spread bullshit lies on social media. Republicans should be held to a different, much stricter standard.

      And applying these different standards is exactly why this is considered election interference.
    • Facebook and Twitter shouldn't get to decide what news reporting voters are allowed to see.

      Facebook and Twitter weren’t standing next to Biden that day when he met with the Ukrainians or didn't meet with the Ukrainians. We’re you standing there? I don't think you were.

      If the info is false, refute it with facts. Hiding info is anti-democratic.

    • Ted Cruz says it's, "election interference" not allowing them to spread bullshit lies that will affect the outcome of the election?

      Reminds me of how Net Neutrality to them, goes against the First Amendment.

      And the fallout from Twitter's stupid move continues. Cruz is just doing what politicians do.

      Face it, Twitter screwed up and made this classic "October Surprise" a story with actual legs. It would have been a quick flash by the NYP, but No, Twitter couldn't let that happen and now look... This story will go on and on, round and round, regardless of the veracity of the purported evidence. Republicans will keep batting it into the air and the press won't be able to avoid watching the bounding ball. We

      • by sinij ( 911942 )
        You also have to take similar stance on what The Atlantic (unconfirmed and unsourced insults of troops) and NYT (unconfirmed tax returns) did exactly what you blame here, yet they were not in any form or way even slapped on the hand.

        The real scandal is why one set of rules applies to Left smears and completely other set of rules applies to Right smears?
      • by malkavian ( 9512 )

        Quite true, though I'm thinking that Twitter was put in a no-win situation. FB and Twitter both declared they'd not carry anything that would influence the election, which these emails being broadcast would certainly come under.
        Now they're in the situation of whether to block it as "Unsubstantiated, and not yet factual", in which case they'd be doing generally what they said they'd do, or letting it go through and making a mockery of what they'd said they'd do (which they'd have been hauled over the coals

  • Holy F (Score:5, Funny)

    by burtosis ( 1124179 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @11:58AM (#60610534)

    Never before have we seen active censorship of a major press publication with serious allegations of corruption of one of the two candidates for president.

    Holy F***, this is major news, I can’t believe we’ve heard nothing about this! Hunter Biden is running for President! Why isn’t this on every front page?!?

    • Re:Holy F (Score:4, Informative)

      by Entrope ( 68843 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:07PM (#60610604) Homepage

      The email in yesterday's story indicates that Joe Biden personally met with the corrupt head of the Ukrainian energy company that had recently hired Hunter Biden. Joe Biden claimed he had never taken part in any such of meeting, or even any discussion of his son's business dealings. If yesterday's email is real, that means Joe Biden repeatedly lied about that, and it brings into question why he did not recuse himself from US government dealings with Ukraine.

      (The email in today's Biden story shows that Hunter Biden thought equity in a Chinese-backed company "was so much more interesting to me and my family", with one breakdown showing 20% of the equity apparently going to Hunter and 10% "held by H[unter] for the big guy". Which big guy would that have been?)

      • 10% "held by H[unter] for the big guy"

        Putin?

    • Yeah. Pay no attention to my crook of a kid and how I enable his graft. Gotcha.
      • Meh, it’s not like he’s stealing from a children’s cancer charity. Gonna have to go with the lesser of two evils on this one.
    • by sinij ( 911942 )
      So as long as the bribe didn't go directly to Joe, instead Hunter accepting the padded envelope in the other room, it isn't blatant corruption?
  • by erp_consultant ( 2614861 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:16PM (#60610658)

    Joe Biden has repeatedly stated that he never discussed business affairs with his son yet we have emails from a Burisma executive thanking Hunter for introducing him to his Dad Joe.

    How did Hunter get that plum assignment with Burisma without having any experience in the Oil and Gas business and not being able to speak any of the languages spoken at the board meetings? Exactly what benefit is he able to add, other than access to Joe?

    Just this morning I read a story about Hunter's involvement with Ye Jianming, former Chairman of CEFC China Energy, with an email outlining a $30 million dollar (10 million a year for 3 years) payment plus bonuses, 'based on introductions alone'. It also detailed a 'much more lasting and lucrative arrangement.'

    This whole thing stinks to high heaven. The American people have a right to know what is going on here and instead what we are getting is a coordinated cover up.

    • I was on the fence before, but now I'm definitely not voting for Hunter Biden.
    • Coordinated coverup? Are you serious? How many right wing outlets and PACs are there? You are telling me none of them are competent to dig up the proper evidence and publish it and put ads about it?

      Jesus if the "main stream media" was even remotely as evil and coordinated as some people believe one would begin to wonder how even half the Republicans got into office, let alone control all THREE branches for 2 years. Even today, it's like Goliath being afraid of David. The ONLY power the Dems have had ove

    • > This whole thing stinks to high heaven. The American people have a right to know what is going on here and instead what we are getting is a coordinated cover up.

      That's what you think. Other people think you exist to be milked for taxes so they can be rich and powerful.

      Their role is to prune back hard the Tree of Liberty at every opportunity.

      Generally, they act and the other people don't - concentrated interests and diffuse costs problem. Having sociopathy as a character trait helps in their endeavour

  • by smooth wombat ( 796938 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:22PM (#60610698) Journal
    I'm curious how the yellow bellied coward [usatoday.com] from Texas thinks not having a fake story about a candidate is election interference? It's not like Twitter is putting up fake ballot drop boxes [cbsnews.com] and ignoring a state's command to remove them, or suddenly having only one place to drop off mail-in ballots [theguardian.com] in certain counties while other counties get multiple locations.

    Not running a fake story would seem to be the responsible thing to do. Or isn't responsible what the fake Senator from Texas wants?
  • It is a tabloid. (Score:4, Informative)

    by SvnLyrBrto ( 62138 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:22PM (#60610702)

    Even if the New York post were not a Rupert Murdoch property... which shoots its credibility to zero anyway; it is just a TABLOID, which drops its credibility to less than zero. They are not even intended to ever be real news source in the first place. If I want to know how Bat Boy and the Loch Ness Monster are getting along now that they have added Bigfoot to their relationship and formed a polyamorous thruple, or how a bug is wearing an Edgar suit during its pursuit of the galaxy, I will pick up a tabloid. But a tabloid masquerading as news? Yeah, no.

  • by networkzombie ( 921324 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:25PM (#60610728)
    If this computer-repair person is for real, he should lose his business. Why is he searching through emails?
    • by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:40PM (#60610846) Homepage Journal

      > If this computer-repair person is for real, he should lose his business. Why is he searching through emails?

      Supposedly the computer was dropped off with contact info that was no good and the owner never came back to claim it.

      What would you do?
      1. See if you can figure out whose it is by the data on the drive and get it back to them.
      2. Hold on to it forever.
      3. Hold onto it for X days and then recycle it.
      4. Hold onto it for X days and then resell it.

      What if you did #1 and what you found was evidence of crimes?

      Are you so privacy-centric that if you found pedo on the drive you'd just be a pal and not call the cops?

      It seems he did #1 and then turned it over to the FBI . That seems reasonable.

      He also knows that the FBI is incredibly corrupt and kept an image because he doesn't trust them. After a while it appears he gave it to the President's lawyer. The President is authorized to handle all classifications of information.

      Not sure where the hangup is.

      • So what normal businessman has access to the presidents lawyer? Can you just email him and say hey look what I found? If this were a court case it would be thrown out for having evidence improperly collected and handled.

      • Rudy Giuliani's lawyer (what a character he must be) has no official capacity in the US government. If what you say is true, then yeah he may have done the right thing by turning over the data to the FBI. Keeping it and then handing it over to someone as a political treasure chest is unethical. Personally, I would have gone with option #3.

        Honestly though the real story here isn't even the computer repair guy. Why would Hunter Biden be dumb enough to just turn over a laptop full of incriminating videos to
  • by techdolphin ( 1263510 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:30PM (#60610758)
    I hope one Senator asks this question: "How come you have not blocked Trump's Twitter account to prevent him from spreading lies?"
  • Twitter ~= Press (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NoMoreACs ( 6161580 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:32PM (#60610778)

    Twitter is not âoethe Pressâ.

    It is their platform, and they have zero First Amendment restrictions on "Censorship".

    Grow up.

    Oh, and The New York Post??? (Rollseyes)

  • These were purportedly Gmail to Gmail.

    Let's see and verify (or not) the headers.

    Rudy, send me the mbox if you dare.

  • a) Someone acquires illegslly some emails from a laptop he is supposed to repair.
    b) A news outlet publishs them _illegsaly_
    c) A website refuses to be drawn into that _illegal_ behaviour and blocks links to that news outlet.

    The web site's CEO is now in the line of fire but not a) or b)??? How retaeded is that? And I saw already two "but free speach, oh oh" posts here ... which is even more retarded.

  • by WindBourne ( 631190 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @12:47PM (#60610910) Journal
    Ok, lets see.

    Fox News portrayed it as one of the biggest scandals in American history. Then it fell apart [cnn.com]

    Not a SINGLE CHARGE after an investigation that lasted longer than what Trump/Barr allowed Mueller to investigate trump.

    Top Intelligence Official Releases Unverified, Previously Rejected Russia Information [nytimes.com]
    John Ratcliffe Pledged to Stay Apolitical. Then He Began Serving Trump’s Political Agenda. [nytimes.com]
    Never in our history has NSA, CIA, etc been involved in such treasonous acts.

    Now, we have a laptop that supposedly belongs to Hunter Biden, but the store owner could not be certain. And it contained such incriminating evidence that hunter dropped it off last month and left it there. Oddly, the store owner claims that he tried to contact hunter but could not do so.

    This is something that one of the many tolls here on /. would be PROUD that their nation pull offed such BS.
  • by Yumi Saotome ( 470249 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @01:02PM (#60611028) Journal

    There was a time when Slashdot would immediately scream "The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it", plaster stuff like 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 everywhere in defiance of corporate censorship regardless of the content being censored, and proclaim fuck the corporate powers.

    That Slashdot has died.

  • by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday October 15, 2020 @02:20PM (#60611398)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

1 1 was a race-horse, 2 2 was 1 2. When 1 1 1 1 race, 2 2 1 1 2.

Working...