

Buried in the latest Twitter files dump is perhaps one of the most hilarious little tidbits you might ever find. While discussing how they can box out a certain State Department organization called the “Global Engagement Center-a fledgling analytic/intelligence arm of the State Department.” Twitter was getting tired of all the government agencies having access to Twitter executives, and the GEC was the one they wanted to get rid of. Former Twitter head of Trust and Safety, Yoel Roth, described the GEC as “political” and having a “track record of actively advancing specific ideological agendas.” He explains his belief that their “blitz on these [action request] issues is at least in part an attempt to insert themselves into the conversations we’ve had with DHS, FBI, ODNI, and others.” He complained that they’ve even “explicitly requested to participate in those conversations.” And that was just one government organization too far, apparently.
But like Roth said, DHS and FBI involvement were apparently totally fine. Why? He HILARIOUSLY says that it’s because “Site Integrity’s engagement with DHS/FBI/etc has been fruitful precisely because they’re (generally) apolitical.”
17.A deeper reason was a perception that unlike the DHS and FBI, which were “apolitical,” as Roth put it, the GEC was “political,” which in Twitter-ese appeared to be partisan code.
— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) January 3, 2023
“I think they thought the FBI was less Trumpy,” is how one former DOD official put it. pic.twitter.com/y33deYO50B
HAHAHAHA!!!! Y’all, this is 2020! This is after YEARS of hyperpartisan and incredibly corrupt action by the FBI regarding Russia/Trump collusion has been exposed. The FBI had been proven to be full of ultra political activist hacks who sold their souls and their agency’s reputation to push a very specific political narrative. And here’s Roth calling them “generally apolitical?!” What he means is that they seem to be on what Roth considers to be the correct side of politics. And that’s really been the issue with Big Tech censorship, right? Who gets to decide what’s considered “correct?”