Turley: Dorsey the Dupe -- or designated defendant?

645 Views | 1 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by Buying_time
captkirk
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Quote:

The latest Twitter disclosures have raised potential legal liability for Twitter and its executives. No one appears more at risk than Twitter's former CEO Jack Dorsey

It is an ironic turn of events since Dorsey supported the takeover by Elon Musk and has called for all files to be released without filtering. Dorsey has the feel of a "designated defendant," someone who was pushed forward by others to take any legal hit.

On its face, Dorsey has vulnerability after the latest release. He was repeatedly asked by members of Congress about censoring and shadow-banning, which has now been confirmed in these files.
In September 2018, Dorsey testified under oath and denied what these files appear to now confirm. Rep. Mike Doyle, D., Pa., asked, "Social media is being rigged to censor conservatives. Is that true of Twitter?"

Dorsey responded, "No."

Doyle then asked "Are you censoring people?"

"No," Dorsey said.

"Twitter's shadow-banning prominent Republicans… is that true?" Doyle asked.
Dorsey again said no.

Dorsey was also asked about my prior testimony on private censorship in circumventing the First Amendment as a type of censorship by surrogate. Dorsey and the other CEOs were asked about my warning of a "'little brother' problem, a problem which private entities do for the government that which it cannot legally do for itself." In response, Dorsey insisted that "we don't have a censoring department."

It now appears that the entire company was operating as a censoring department. However, there were in fact super-censors. Dorsey did not mention the Strategic Response Team-Global Escalation Team (SRT-GET), which operated above what journalist Bari Weiss described as "a level beyond official ticketing, beyond the rank-and-file moderators following the company's policy on paper."

That group reportedly included Vijaya Gadde, head of Legal, Policy and Trust; Yoel Roth, the global head of Trust and Safety; CEOs Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal, and others.

Notably, others at the company made similar denials as Dorsey but may not have done so under oath. In 2018, Gadde and head of product Kayvon Beykpour expressly declared, "We do not shadow-ban. And we certainly don't shadow-ban based on political viewpoints or ideology."

Even if untrue, lying in public is generally not a crime. However, when you repeat a lie to federal investigators or Congress or the courts, it becomes a federal offense.
https://jonathanturley.org/2022/12/11/dupe-or-the-designated-defendant-the-criminal-case-against-jack-dorsey/


Buying_time
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack will be sacrificed by the "Party".

The Dem elite sucked him in as part of their win at all cost scheme. MSM and unsocial media fell in line with the agenda hearing the SJW words being whispered in their ears. At the end of the day, the elite do not care about the collateral damage. He needs to be on Arkancide watch.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.