Vice reports Twitter’s win against a request from DOJ to unmask the users behind a Twitter account that is appropriate used by a group of anti-Trump government employees, @ALT_uscis.
The report has a gleeful tone to it that some big guns lawyers lined up to oppose the “administrative warrant” against the government.
The problem here is not that the government surveillance state was pushed back, but the raging hypocrisy of Twitter executives in their justification for this “principled” stand.
Twitter’s “scathing letter of objection includes this gem:
“Attempts to unmask anonymous online speakers in the absence of a prima facie defamation claim are improper and would chill the First Amendment rights of speakers who use Twitter’s platform to express their thoughts and ideas instantly and publicly, without barriers.”
Now, that is a gem, in isolation as such. Free speech and all.
But Twitter’s actions against users who want to use Twitter as a “platform to express their thoughts and ideas instantly and publicly, without barriers.”, speak louder than these words.
Banning the expressions of effective speech by other users exposing selected crimes by Deep State operatives, including revelations of the Obama team’s illegal unmasking and surveillance of Trump campaign, and the rest of us.
And then there’s the shadow banning of dissident voices of opposition to shadow government and other instances of Deep-State crimes and ridicule against its propaganda.
So it just depends on which part of Deep State Twitter decides to support. In other words, Twitter has picked one of the two sides in the internecine tug of war inside the State.
I mean shadow-banning Dilbert, Twitter? Really? Champion of free speech?state
Nothing hidden, said Jesus, that will not be known abroad…