Fierce Patriots

Conservative Political News

  • Subscribe

<![CDATA[Twitter]]>

WATCH: Josh Hawley Calmly Dismantles Reporter Who Flipped His Lid Over Elon Musk

by Leave a Comment

Are Republicans finally learning how to handle the press? The answer to that is probably not, but there are at least some in the GOP who have gotten the message, and Sen. Josh Hawley is one of them.

In a recent interview with St. Louis affiliate KSDK, Hawley brought the receipts and confronted a reporter named Mark Maxwell over his past condemnation of Elon Musk. The result was pretty funny, with Maxwell deciding that the best explanation to offer was that he was drunk-tweeting.

Ladies and gentlemen, your vaunted press corps.

HAWLEY: I gotta ask ya, why all the hate for people who like free speech on Twitter, what’s uh, what’s going on with that?

MAXWELL: I don’t understand your reference, what are you referring to

HAWLEY: When you said, uh, you called proponents, people who liked Elon Musk buying the site Twitter a bunch of “booklicker.” This was on March 6th. I’m looking at it right here. Seems kind of vitroilic.

MAXWELL: Yeah, I suppose it was, it was a moment of frustration when the site went down and there were a lot of folks in my mentions who have quite, uh, the cultish adoration for him, (crosstalk) in my opinion.

Yeah, going to bat and defending him at every turn even when he was banning journalists from the site for no apparent reason, uh, yeah, I felt like the industry of jouranlism, a part of the First Amendment has come under attack, at times, from Mr. Musk.

Let’s stop right there because several parts of Maxwell’s answer are just silly. For one, Twitter crashed many times under the old regime. The idea that the downtime in early-March was some unique circumstance caused by the fact that Musk gutted the bloated company is a dumb suggestion. And really, is this guy so addicted to Twitter that he couldn’t handle not using it for a few hours?

As to his claims about Musk banning “journalists” for “no apparent reason,” that’s just false. Aaron Rupar, for example, is not a journalist. He’s a leftwing hack who posts out-of-context clips in the mold of Media Matters. He was banned for breaking the TOS after linking to a site that doxxed the location of Musk’s private jet. Even still, Rupar and others were unbanned within a day or so.

That’s a far cry from the crackdown on dissenting opinions that happened under the old Twitter regime. Did Maxwell ever complain about that? Of course, he didn’t, at least not that I can find. These “journalists” only care about free speech in the context of left-wing reporters not having to follow basic rules. When it comes to actual censorship, they clap like seals.

HAWLEY: You also said that you didn’t necessarily do any of this sober, “I didn’t do any of this sober” you said. I hope you do our interview sober. I hope you’re sober now.

Hawley had other examples and caught Maxwell completely off-guard. Things continued from there with the reporter tripping over himself to lighten the mood and walk back some of his statements. It’s a fun clip to watch.

I’d like to think other Republicans would take a cue from the Missouri senator about how to handle the press. Unfortunately, far too many in the GOP still think they can woo these partisans over to their side. It’s never going to happen, and anyone going into an interview without having done their homework is going to end up embarrassed. Hawley knows how to play the game, though.

Trending on RedState Video

Let Them (The Tech Giants) Fight Dot Gif!

by Leave a Comment

If Americans think they’re mad at tech giants like Facebook, Google, and Twitter for censorship and suppression of speech, they should know that their anger apparently doesn’t compare to the disgust these companies have for each other.

Google, for example, is aiming its “transparency” project directly at Facebook and claiming that the embattled site is “hosting and inadvertently promoting extremist pages” by auto-creating pages for terrorist groups like the Islamic State and al Qaeda.

Facebook’s algorithm has automatically created over 100 pages for US-designated terrorist groups like Islamic State and Al-Quaeda, according to a new report by the Tech Transparency Project (TTP).

TTP is a research initiative of non-profit watchdog organization Campaign for Accountability that, according to the TTP website, “uses research, litigation and aggressive communications to expose misconduct and malfeasance in public life.” TTP began as the Google Transparency Project in 2016 and has expanded to cover several major tech companies.

The Capital Research Center [disclosure: I work for CRC], another non-profit watchdog founded during the Reagan administration, described TTP as left-leaning in its politics although the group itself does not claim to identify with a political bent.

Specifically, CRC’s Influence Watch describes the Campaign for Accountability this way:

“The Campaign for Accountability (CfA) is an ostensibly nonpartisan left-wing advocacy organization founded to expose supposed misconduct and corruption in the government and private sector. CfA typically targets conservative government officials or organizations in its investigations and has two Democratic operatives serving on its board of directors. [It] was formed by alumni of another left-wing “watchdog” organization, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) [and] is a former project of the Hopewell Fund, a left-of-center 501(c)(3) funding and fiscal sponsorship nonprofit and part of the multi-million-dollar “dark money” network managed by Arabella Advisors, a consultancy in Washington, DC. CfA has called for the investigations of dozens of conservative lawmakers and Cabinet secretaries including former Department of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar…CfA also runs a research initiative backed by Oracle called the Google Transparency Project, in which it explores Google’s influence on various governments and public policies.”

This cultural revolution on the left seems pointed directly…at itself.

But it makes sense for Google to start banging the drums about how other tech platforms are misbehaving. They are, after all, currently facing some pretty serious charges in a couple of lawsuits that made it all the way to the Supreme Court. And those lawsuits — in a less than shocking twist — also are related to terrorism.

 In Gonzalez v. Google, Gonzalez’s survivors claim that the tech giant Google should compensate them for the loss of their loved one. In a separate suit, Twitter v. Taamneh, Alassaf’s relatives make similar claims against Google, Twitter, and Facebook.

The thrust of both lawsuits is that websites like Twitter, Facebook, or Google-owned YouTube are legally responsible for the two ISIS killings because ISIS was able to post recruitment videos and other content on these websites that were not immediately taken down. The plaintiffs in both suits rely on a federal law that allows “any national of the United States” who is injured by an act of international terrorism to sue anyone who “aids and abets, by knowingly providing substantial assistance” to anyone who commits “such an act of international terrorism.”

Is it too much to hope that the Big Tech companies, partisan though they are, continue this tradition of policing each other so the government regulatory regime has less of an interest in doing it for them? That’s not to suggest they’ll be ethical in their competitive regulatory regime, but the less government is involved in private enterprise, the better.

Trending on RedState Video

Twitter Is Censoring Republicans Again

by Leave a Comment

After Elon Musk took over Twitter, a renaissance of engagement with conservative thinkers began. Even someone as insignificant as myself compared to much larger accounts started gaining thousands of followers a month.

Recently, that growth has slowed to a trickle and impressions have fallen through the floor. Now, there’s even more direct evidence that the censorship is back with a vengeance.

Tucker Carlson recently shared statements from Ron DeSantis and Donald Trump in which both men broke from the preferred narrative on Ukraine. His account is now shadowbanned, and not showing up in searches.

Apparently, daring to suggest that there be any nuance in US policy toward Ukraine is off-limits for the Twitter hall monitors that remain at the company. Carlson is one of the biggest names in conservative thought (even if he strays from orthodox thinking at times). To have him search-banned is pretty nuts, and it smacks of the actions taken prior to Musk’s takeover.

That’s not the only example, though. Ron DeSantis is being personally censored for sharing a video in which a parent talks about protecting children from harmful transgender ideology. The tweet is currently throttled with a message that claims he may have violated Twitter’s “rules against hateful conduct.”

How is it hateful conduct for parents to not want children to mutilate and chemically castrated? Is that really where we are as a society? Somehow, I doubt that’s a popular position, but it seems to be the position of Twitter.

Musk promised a free expression of ideas when he bought Twitter. That is clearly a promise that is not being kept if this kind of censorship is happening again. I’ll be charitable and assume that these are actions being taken by rogue actors still embedded in the company. But it is up to Musk to lay down the law and stop this nonsense.

Lastly, if this is a result of some non-human-involved algorithm, then that algorithm needs to be changed immediately. It is not hateful to believe in biological reality and to want to protect children. That is a mainstream position among Americans and one that needs to be shared. Musk needs to fix this and fix it immediately.

Trending on RedState Video

Cruz, Jordan Pen Scathing Letter to FTC on Its Investigation of Musk Buying Twitter

by Leave a Comment

It’s an investigation of the investigation. That’s according to Axios, which reported Friday that it obtained a copy of a new letter from Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Chair, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), co-signed by House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), to the chair of the Federal Trade Commission.

The Senate committee writes that the scathing letter involves the federal agency’s “inappropriate and burdensome demands,” as part of its deep-dive into Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter:

The “FTC’s legal authority does not include dictating entire swaths of corporate behavior under the guise of consent decree enforcement,” Jordan and Cruz wrote in a Friday letter to FTC Chair Lina Khan that was obtained by Axios.

“Nor could it justify infringing on the First Amendment… Congress will not tolerate any retaliation against whistleblowers.”

…

The letter asks for documents and communications with FTC officials, employees or consultants relating to the Twitter investigation or Musk’s purchase of Twitter.

It also asks the FTC to “explain, in writing, your justification” for asking Twitter to provide the names of members of the media who have been granted access to Twitter’s internal communications and documents.

The Axios report goes on to explain that “the FTC has sent more than a dozen letters to Twitter since Elon Musk took over, requesting information about recent layoffs as well as details on the firm’s sharing of internal documents with journalists,” something which unsurprisingly has raised eyebrows for members of the Judiciary Committee.

Good to see conservative lawmakers like Cruz and Jordan working to hold the Biden administration accountable for possible bullying of Musk, just as he’s trying to get Twitter on solid footing. We’ll keep you posted on this effort as it moves forward.

Trending on RedState Video

Hilarious Tantrum by Progressive Journalist When He Gets ‘Checked’ by Twitter Community Notes

by Leave a Comment

The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of RedState.com.

We’ve seen Democrats and media throwing all kinds of tantrums over Tucker Carlson’s Jan. 6 video footage coverage. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) said he released the footage to aid transparency, that he worked with the Capitol Police to ensure there weren’t any security issues that could be revealed with any of the footage–something that the Jan. 6 Committee didn’t do with the footage they used.

So, why would anyone object to greater transparency? Why would Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) want to suppress that speech and create a constitutional problem by threatening Carlson and Fox?

If you think he’s lying or wrong, simply counter what he has said with your evidence. Carlson invited Schumer on his show to do that. Yet, Schumer refused to go on. That says it all right there. It’s about the panic in D.C., that the narrative that they’ve been peddling for so long is being questioned and may be slipping from their grasp.

We see that with the reaction to Twitter as well. Since Elon Musk has taken over, it may not be perfect. There are still issues, for example, with people getting wrongly suspended, like Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT). But what you do have is someone who is responding to the concerns, is rectifying things, and seems to truly care about freedom of speech. People are now free to talk about things that would have gotten them wrongly banned and suppressed for going against whatever the dominant liberal narrative was in the past on issues from COVID to Jan. 6.

Musk has also instituted a fascinating thing over the past few months — Community Notes, which allows people to weigh in to help fact-check and/or add more context to tweets. Joe Biden, through this method, was finally getting truly fact-checked on some of his more egregious lies. It even added context to a Musk tweet. Musk didn’t get upset; he praised the function, saying it was adding more and helping everyone.

So, just like with Tucker Carlson, who could truly object to more context? Progressive journalist Judd Legum, for one, and his tantrum is pretty funny. He thinks Community Notes is being “weaponized” against him somehow by anonymous people.

Is weaponizing anything like “pouncing”? Adding more context to explain a tweet isn’t “weaponizing” — it isn’t even necessarily attacking the tweet. It’s helping people to understand what’s being said in full context. But imagine getting upset about this.

He also didn’t seem to understand why they were providing “context” — because he was changing the parameters of what was being talked about. He was responding to a comment by Ashley Parker about “crime” being out of control. His response was “violent crime” had gone down, according to the stats he was citing. So, the Community Notes accurately pointed out that he changed the parameters and that she wasn’t just talking about “violent crime.” That’s exactly the purpose of the Community Notes, and they worked very well there.

What was even funnier was that they put a Community Note on his complaint about Community Notes to explain their purpose to him, since he didn’t seem to get it.

He started going down a rabbit hole trying to defend himself, although how he’s defining robbery is correct. But he just keeps missing the point that he was changing the parameters of the original statement – which was on “crime.”

However, he got into the weeds when he had to admit that homicides had gone up.

Indeed, homicides have gone up 31 percent, which is a huge amount, so trying to deflect around that isn’t going to go over.

Lucy Ricardo may have said it best.

Trending on RedState Video