Anonymous ID: 9b54b9 Feb. 8, 2023, 1:25 p.m. No.18309461   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9466 >>9473 >>9485 >>9489 >>9656 >>9896 >>9915

>>18309411

 

Raskin's plugs and cancer have addled his tiny brain.

 

The F_I, a state actor, was requesting (ahem, directing) Twitter to censor tweets. You cannot use a private company as an agent to do something you yourself cannot do under the Constitution. First Amendment applies, and Twitter / F_I violated users' First Amendment rights.

 

So, yes, clearly there was state action. Open and shut case.

 

F_I also likely violated many other laws, especially those pertaining to election interference and treason or insurrection.

Anonymous ID: 9b54b9 Feb. 8, 2023, 1:31 p.m. No.18309489   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>18309461

 

Committee needs to ask witnesses why they complied.

 

The internal communications evidencing that Twatter execs did not agree w the F_I calls on some of the censorship is damning for the F_I.

 

Shows agency.