Over the weekend, Michael Shellenberger dropped “The Twitter Files Part 4.” This part was focused on Donald Trump’s removal from Twitter.
1. TWITTER FILES, PART 4
The Removal of Donald Trump: January 7
As the pressure builds, Twitter executives build the case for a permanent ban
— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 10, 2022
Today, Bari Weiss is dropping Part 5. And, like Part 4, it concerns Twitter banning Donald Trump’s account.
THREAD: THE TWITTER FILES PART FIVE.
THE REMOVAL OF TRUMP FROM TWITTER.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Shall we get right into it? Yes. Let’s shall:
1. On the morning of January 8, President Donald Trump, with one remaining strike before being at risk of permanent suspension from Twitter, tweets twice.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
2. 6:46 am: “The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!” pic.twitter.com/7L252fqqK6
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
3. 7:44 am: “To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.” pic.twitter.com/bRF7O4Ijcf
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
4. For years, Twitter had resisted calls both internal and external to ban Trump on the grounds that blocking a world leader from the platform or removing their controversial tweets would hide important information that people should be able to see and debate.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
5. “Our mission is to provide a forum that enables people to be informed and to engage their leaders directly,” the company wrote in 2019. Twitter’s aim was to “protect the public’s right to hear from their leaders and to hold them to account.”https://t.co/rtQjkQQxSs
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
6. But after January 6, as @mtaibbi and @shellenbergermd have documented, pressure grew, both inside and outside of Twitter, to ban Trump.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
7. There were dissenters inside Twitter.
“Maybe because I am from China,” said one employee on January 7, “I deeply understand how censorship can destroy the public conversation.” pic.twitter.com/LtonK0gfS3
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Good on that employee. They were exactly right.
8. But voices like that one appear to have been a distinct minority within the company. Across Slack channels, many Twitter employees were upset that Trump hadn’t been banned earlier.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
9. After January 6, Twitter employees organized to demand their employer ban Trump. “There is a lot of employee advocacy happening,” said one Twitter employee. pic.twitter.com/x9Xty6ndYP
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
10. “We have to do the right thing and ban this account,” said one staffer.
It’s “pretty obvious he’s going to try to thread the needle of incitement without violating the rules,” said another. pic.twitter.com/9vgvSgqJBB
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Uh, OK.
They had to ban him or he would've kept not breaking their rules https://t.co/f5ldVfih9s
— jimtreacher.substack.com (@jtLOL) December 12, 2022
They just wanted him off Twitter. Didn’t matter whether or not he actually violated any rules. They had already made up their mind a long time ago.
11. In the early afternoon of January 8, The Washington Post published an open letter signed by over 300 Twitter employees to CEO Jack Dorsey demanding Trump’s ban. “We must examine Twitter’s complicity in what President-Elect Biden has rightly termed insurrection.”
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
12. But the Twitter staff assigned to evaluate tweets quickly concluded that Trump had *not* violated Twitter’s policies.“I think we’d have a hard time saying this is incitement,” wrote one staffer.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Go figure.
13. “It's pretty clear he's saying the ‘American Patriots’ are the ones who voted for him and not the terrorists (we can call them that, right?) from Wednesday.”
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
14. Another staffer agreed: “Don’t see the incitement angle here.” pic.twitter.com/6mbUU2Tma0
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
15. “I also am not seeing clear or coded incitement in the DJT tweet,” wrote Anika Navaroli, a Twitter policy official. “I’ll respond in the elections channel and say that our team has assessed and found no vios”—or violations—“for the DJT one.” pic.twitter.com/DnJk2UUuf6
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
16. She does just that: “as an fyi, Safety has assessed the DJT Tweet above and determined that there is no violation of our policies at this time.” pic.twitter.com/wMQ68Hu2xA
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Guess Anika eventually had a change of heart:
17. (Later, Navaroli would testify to the House Jan. 6 committee:“For months I had been begging and anticipating and attempting to raise the reality that if nothing—if we made no intervention into what I saw occuring, people were going to die.”)
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Huh.
But back to the timeline:
18. Next, Twitter’s safety team decides that Trump’s 7:44 am ET tweet is also not in violation. They are unequivocal: “it’s a clear no vio. It’s just to say he’s not attending the inauguration” pic.twitter.com/zdxSsG1UBS
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
19. To understand Twitter’s decision to ban Trump, we must consider how Twitter deals with other heads of state and political leaders, including in Iran, Nigeria, and Ethiopia.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
It’s eye-opening, to say the least:
20. In June 2018, Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tweeted, “#Israel is a malignant cancerous tumor in the West Asian region that has to be removed and eradicated: it is possible and it will happen.”
Twitter neither deleted the tweet nor banned the Ayatollah. pic.twitter.com/D6Cb1F05sY
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
21. In October 2020, the former Malaysian Prime Minister said it was “a right” for Muslims to “kill millions of French people.”
Twitter deleted his tweet for “glorifying violence,” but he remains on the platform. The tweet below was taken from the Wayback Machine: pic.twitter.com/7tgxgCw9I9
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
22. Muhammadu Buhari, the President of Nigeria, incited violence against pro-Biafra groups.“Those of us in the fields for 30 months, who went through the war,” he wrote, “will treat them in the language they understand.”
Twitter deleted the tweet but didn't ban Buhari.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
23. In October 2021, Twitter allowed Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed to call on citizens to take up arms against the Tigray region.
Twitter allowed the tweet to remain up, and did not ban the prime minister. pic.twitter.com/DThmGsJM1r
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
24. In early February 2021, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government threatened to arrest Twitter employees in India, and to incarcerate them for up to seven years after they restored hundreds of accounts that had been critical of him.
Twitter did not ban Modi. pic.twitter.com/s7dyDlNbaS
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
But Twitter banned Donald Trump.
25. But Twitter executives did ban Trump, even though key staffers said that Trump had not incited violence—not even in a “coded” way.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Trump tweeted all kinds of crazy stuff. But it was absolutely nothing compared to what the other leaders Weiss mentions above have tweeted.
26. Less than 90 minutes after Twitter employees had determined that Trump’s tweets were not in violation of Twitter policy, Vijaya Gadde—Twitter’s Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust—asked whether it could, in fact, be “coded incitement to further violence.” pic.twitter.com/llJRMfpOPi
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
“Coded incitement.” Which is evidently code for “everything Donald Trump tweets is incitement even if it really isn’t incitement at all.”
27. A few minutes later, Twitter employees on the “scaled enforcement team” suggest that Trump’s tweet may have violated Twitter’s Glorification of Violence policy—if you interpreted the phrase “American Patriots” to refer to the rioters. pic.twitter.com/Wszq4zBqnW
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
As Weiss noted earlier in her thread, a Twitter employee pointed out that that was not a fair interpretation.
28. Things escalate from there.
Members of that team came to “view him as the leader of a terrorist group responsible for violence/deaths comparable to Christchurch shooter or Hitler and on that basis and on the totality of his Tweets, he should be de-platformed.” pic.twitter.com/QD4DvrUEhO
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
“Or Hitler.” Hitler???
This is insane. Twitter employees really believed Trump was Hitler. https://t.co/iTJVbwaXCE
— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) December 12, 2022
“Insane” is putting it mildly.
29. Two hours later, Twitter executives host a 30-minute all-staff meeting.
Jack Dorsey and Vijaya Gadde answer staff questions as to why Trump wasn’t banned yet.
But they make some employees angrier.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
30. “Multiple tweeps [Twitter employees] have quoted the Banality of Evil suggesting that people implementing our policies are like Nazis following orders,” relays Yoel Roth to a colleague. pic.twitter.com/cm5yzuSYSV
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
31. Dorsey requested simpler language to explain Trump’s suspension.
Roth wrote, “god help us [this] makes me think he wants to share it publicly” pic.twitter.com/KTMumR0rDD
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
32. One hour later, Twitter announces Trump’s permanent suspension “due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
And there you have it. There was no way to demonstrate that Donald Trump’s tweets amounted to incitement to violence, but Twitter speech cops had made up their minds a long time ago.
33. Many at Twitter were ecstatic. pic.twitter.com/wgxuwQBLkU
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
What a shocker.
"thank you everyone for your impactful work this week [deplatforming the president despite our having found he didn't violate our terms of service]" https://t.co/Et12btqgZD
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) December 12, 2022
No doubt the Champagne was flowing.
34. And congratulatory: “big props to whoever in trust and safety is sitting there whack-a-mole-ing these trump accounts” pic.twitter.com/8ZssvH9ooH
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
35. By the next day, employees expressed eagerness to tackle “medical misinformation” as soon as possible: pic.twitter.com/kJKqZaSekt
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
And why not? After getting Trump banned from Twitter, they were on a roll.
They couldn't have constructed their slippery slope any faster https://t.co/uUHvLg6SHS
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) December 12, 2022
Twitter saw that slippery slope and said “Wheeeeeee!”
36. “For the longest time, Twitter’s stance was that we aren’t the arbiter of truth,” wrote another employee, “which I respected but never gave me a warm fuzzy feeling.” pic.twitter.com/0g6aptJHJg
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Wow.
https://twitter.com/jtLOL/status/1602381796712349697
And in fact fancied themselves arbiters of truth.
If you need to be "the arbiter of truth" to get that "warm fuzzy feeling", then it's time to log off and touch grass.
What an insane thing to say… it's absolutely hilarious except that these people actually held significant power.https://t.co/ALjXuji2B1
— prag (@pragmatometer) December 12, 2022
Are you disturbed yet?
37. But Twitter’s COO Parag Agrawal—who would later succeed Dorsey as CEO—told Head of Security Mudge Zatko: “I think a few of us should brainstorm the ripple effects” of Trump's ban. Agrawal added: “centralized content moderation IMO has reached a breaking point now.” pic.twitter.com/8f5bSXRKk5
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
There shouldn’t’ve been any ripple effects, because they should not have banned Trump in the first place. At least not according to their own rules.
38. Outside the United States, Twitter’s decision to ban Trump raised alarms, including with French President Emmanuel Macron, German Prime Minister Angela Merkel, and Mexico's President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
39. Macron told an audience he didn’t “want to live in a democracy where the key decisions” were made by private players. “I want it to be decided by a law voted by your representative, or by regulation, governance, democratically discussed and approved by democratic leaders.”
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
40. Merkel’s spokesperson called Twitter’s decision to ban Trump from its platform “problematic” and added that the freedom of opinion is of “elementary significance.”
Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny criticized the ban as “an unacceptable act of censorship.”
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
Um, yeah. They’re correct.
https://twitter.com/BecketAdams/status/1602378763177689092
Good Lord.
41. Whether you agree with Navalny and Macron or the executives at Twitter, we hope this latest installment of #TheTwitterFiles gave you insight into that unprecedented decision.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
42. From the outset, our goal in investigating this story was to discover and document the steps leading up to the banning of Trump and to put that choice into context.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
43. Ultimately, the concerns about Twitter’s efforts to censor news about Hunter Biden’s laptop, blacklist disfavored views, and ban a president aren’t about the past choices of executives in a social media company.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
44. They’re about the power of a handful of people at a private company to influence the public discourse and democracy.
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
And about all the people who enabled and encouraged this corruption.
and most (all?) of the mainstream media don't seem to care because they privately — and in some cases, publicly — cheered it on
— Ryan (@alwaysonoffense) December 12, 2022
Once again, when push comes to shove, you can’t count on the MSM for jack squat.
45. This was reported by @ShellenbergerMD, @IsaacGrafstein, @SnoozyWeiss, @Olivia_Reingold, @petersavodnik, @NellieBowles. Follow all of our work at The Free Press: @TheFP
— Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) December 12, 2022
This … was real journalism. The MSM should try it sometime.
Editor’s note: This post has been updated with additional text and tweets.
***
Related:
***
Help us keep owning the libs! Join Twitchy VIP and use promo code AMERICAFIRST to receive a 25% discount off your membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member