TWITTER FILES: PART 7 - Dropping Now!

Sure, why not.

 

You are aware of how criminal trials work, right? Evidence is presented to a jury which weighs that evidence and draws a conclusion of guilty or not guilty. It's really not the evidence that proves anything. It's the opinion of the jurists regarding the evidence that matters. And it only takes reasonable doubt to acquit. So, here you must have reasonable doubt not to convict the FBI. What you can't say is no evidence has been presented. We have here a hung jury.

 

Why are you talking about trials? No one is on trial here so why are you off on a tangent? Nothing of substance to offer?

 

Evidently you've never heard of the court of public opinion. This board is where the trial is taking place. We don't have the power to execute Justice but we do have the power to declare a verdict based upon the known evidence.

 

The FBI as well and Former Presidents and the entire DNC plus a few Republicans. Good Lord, they do not like outsiders crashing their country club.

 

The only time the "court of public opinion" means anything is on election day and the last 2 elections do not bode well for your argument. In 2020 Trump got thumped and still today he talks that the election was rigged AND AT THE SAME TIME says he won by a landslide. Interesting argument but facts don't show anything he says is true. He can't be blamed.......he's insane.

 

Musk's Egregious Mischacterization is...Total BULLSHIT...
And, when that Complete BS is repeated anywhere Online (or Offline) it is a Insult to Collective Intelligence...

Twitter’s guidelines for law enforcement, posted publicly on its website, openly disclose: “Twitter may seek reimbursement for costs associated with information produced pursuant to legal process and as permitted by law (e.g., under 18 U.S.C. §2706).” That law states that the federal government will pay companies for their efforts “obtaining the contents of communications, records, or other information” a fee “for reimbursement for such costs as are reasonably necessary and which have been directly incurred in searching for, assembling, reproducing, or otherwise providing such information.”
Which is to say that the money Twitter collected had nothing to do with censoring anyone. The money was simply given as reimbursement for the processing of legal requests, similar to how a journalist might have to pay a fee for a government agency processing a Freedom of Information Act request. As Alex Stamos, the former chief security officer at Facebook and partner at the cyber consulting firm Krebs Stamos Group, wrote Tuesday, “This is absolutely nothing to do with content moderation.”
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/20/media/elon-musk-fbi-twitter-reliable-sources/index.html

Where do people even come up with this Bullshit?:smdh:

 

See how easy it is to declare a verdict in the case of Trump's sanity? You're right about one thing it doesn't mean anything except in your own mind. That's the way it goes in the court of public opinion. Your verdict was the result of looking at the "evidence".

So let's bring that back to the case that is before us -- the Twitter files. Are they showing evidence of the FBI's collusion with Twitter to suppress free speech? Obviously the answer is yes. The only question before you is whether there's any doubt about their guilt. You can't say there's no evidence.

 

I said he committed no crimes. Why don't you read what I write before responding.

 

No, no it isn't. The only people it's obvious to are the ones that want it to be and to circle back to your reference of my "opinion" that Trump is insane I will again remind you that experts in the field agree with my opinion and not to stray too far off the subject but it does mean a lot when you consider the insane person was president and is running again.

 

Oh ffs. Please take your own advice and read what I wrote...again. Never mind, I'll explain it to you.
#2 said Biden committed crimes, you said he didn't, I said I'm confused. Did he or didn't he? Understand?

 

You're not getting it. Opinions are the basis of any jurist's verdict. Our opinions expressed here amount to a verdict without any force of the law and that's the only difference. You and I both look at the same "evidence" and come to different conclusions. In our minds Trump is either guilty of insanity (your opinion) or there is reasonable doubt (my opinion). That's just the equivalent of a hung jury. Trump goes free.

 

I will take Elon's word for it because he owns the company and has access to information you do not. So, you ridiculing him is a bit rich, to say the least.

"Government paid Twitter millions of dollars to censor info from the public" - Elon Musk

According to Elon Musk, 2020 election was rigged as well. #Twitterfiles

 

Of course you do. You'd believe the earth is flat if he said so.

 

I don't particularly care for Trump, but all the facts show that the election of 2020 was indeed rigged. The domestic enemies of the US Constitution (that term is in the oath of office) are in firm control of the federal government right now. Some feel it is time for secession from the union.

 

I answered that. He did not. He committed acts of corruption which are not illegal.

 

Only if he proved it. OTOH, he would show you proof the world is round and you would cry that is a liar and it's not true. lol

 

And I keep asking for ONE (1) fact that is proof positive that the election was rigged.

 

Public corruption is a federal crime

 

How do you know all the "proof" is real?

Why on earth would I? You are the one obsessed with what he says, not me.

 

Seems like the Democratic Party and their lackeys are quite okay with all this. I find this horrifying for people who purport to care about the usurping of our democracy, don't you?
"Government paid Twitter millions of dollars to censor info from the public" - Elon Musk

 

It's pretty convenient to just sit around outright denying things happened, when there is proof, in order to avoid having the conversation.

"The FBI used the generic briefing as an intelligence gathering tool,"
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/pr...r-double-standard-for-clinton-trump-campaigns

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/new...efforts-co-opt-intel-briefings-spy-2016-trump

"Tump's FBI"? What a lame excuse. I suppose no internal weaponization of the federal government is possible against a sitting president? That's a silly poorly thought out perspective.

 

And you condoned it? Shameful.

 

11. First, it's important to understand that Hunter Biden earned *tens of millions* of dollars in contracts with foreign businesses, including ones linked to China's government, for which Hunter offered no real work.

 

Once again, inventing positons for me and then attacking me on the positions you invented.

I forget, what is that called? Starts with a t......