Comments by "Jack Haveman" (@JackHaveman52) on "Daniel D." channel.

  1. 13
  2. 9
  3.  @Spiritof_76  I don't have to take stock in Taibbi. All I have to do is look at what he showed us in the Twitter files concerning the Hunter Biden laptop. When you have evidence, the person with the evidence is irrelevant. It's the evidence that counts. Metaphorically shooting the messenger, in this case Taibbi, doesn't change the message. Twitter banned any mention of the Hunter laptop story, even the links to the New York post article that exposed the laptop. They went so far as to prevent sharing of this story through private messaging, a measure that was only reserved in the sharing of child pornography. The NY post is the oldest daily newspaper in the US and the 4th largest in the US. Taibbi, Bari Weiss and Michael Shellenberger all said the same thing about the laptop. They said that there was communication between the FBI and Twitter through a special one-way channel that had been setup between these 2 entities. It's also telling that one time FBI special counsel was working for Twitter at this time as well as other former FBI personnel. If the suppression, of a major news story, that the FBI KNEW was true doesn't bother you, I have to wonder what you're agenda is. Is it to support your party or to support the truth? I'm about the facts and truth and I find it appalling that Twitter would suppress, what is known as "censorship" news that might be damaging to one specific party and be helpful to another. That's not just the news of the laptop but also and dissension concerning government Covid policies and mandates. It's a violation of the 1st Amendment and if allowed to stand, that could impact X, now that it's owned by Musk, who could just censor or suppress stories that might damage Trump. I would bet that you'd find that quite upsetting.....yet we weren't even allowed to send a link to that laptop article through Twitter's private messaging service. Clearly a political move.
    1
  4. 1