A witness at a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing Thursday gave Rep. Dan Goldman a lecture on the government’s efforts to suppress Post reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop, saying the Democrat was promoting a ” conspiracy theory” that his hard drive had been “tampered with.” .”
“He’s talked about the Hunter Biden laptop and how the FBI knew it existed,” Goldman (D-NY), who represents Manhattan and Brooklyn, told Substack and “Twitter Files” reporter Michael Shellenberger during a Select Subcommittee on Armamentization. of the Federal Government hearing.
“Of course, you are aware that the laptop, so to speak… that was published in the New York Post, was actually a hard drive that the New York Post admitted here was not authenticated as real,” he said Goldman boldly and incorrectly. —He stated.
“It wasn’t the laptop the FBI had. You are aware of that, right? -Goldman asked.
“It was the same content,” Shellenberger responded.
“Twitter Files” journalist Michael Shellenberger briefed Rep. Dan Goldman on the government’s efforts to censor Post reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop. AP
“How do you know?” Goldman responded. “It would have to be authenticated to know that it has the same content.”
“Are you suggesting that the New York Post participated in a conspiracy to construct the contents of the Hunter Biden laptop?” Shellenberger responded.
“No, sir, the problem is that the hard drives can be manipulated by Rudy Giuliani or Russia,” Goldman said.
“But what is the evidence that that happened?” Shellenberger asked.
“Well, there’s real evidence of that,” Goldman continued. “But the point is, it’s not the same.”
“He’s talked about the Hunter Biden laptop and how the FBI knew it existed,” Goldman told Substack and “Twitter Files” reporter Michael Shellenberger. Reuters
“There’s no evidence of that, so you’re engaging in a conspiracy theory,” Shellenberger said, before being interrupted.
“I’m glad you agree with me, Mr. Shellenberger, that transparency is the most important thing,” Goldman interjected, moving quickly to his next question.
When asked what data might have been “manipulated,” a Goldman spokesperson directed The Post to reports about some files on the hard drive that had been created after Hunter left them at a computer repair store in Wilmington, Delaware, in April 2019. , according to metadata analysis.
The store’s owner, John Paul Mac Isaac, also said in an April 2022 interview with “Real America’s Voice” that there had been “multiple attempts over the last year and a half to insert questionable material into the laptop, not physically, but to pass off this misinformation or disinformation as if it came from the laptop.”
Federal investigators collected the laptop from the Delaware store in December 2019, but not before Mac Isaac made a copy and gave it to Giuliani’s then-personal attorney, Robert Costello.
Giuliani provided The Post with a copy of the hard drive in October 2020.
“There’s no evidence of that, so you’re engaging in a conspiracy theory,” Shellenberger said, before being interrupted by Goldman. CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Independent analyzes by the Washington Post, CBS News, the New York Times and other media outlets have consistently confirmed the authenticity of the content included in the Post’s explosive reports.
Finally, Hunter Biden’s lawyer admitted in February that the laptop belonged to his client, while claiming that Mac Isaac had “illegally” accessed its data.
Emails obtained from the laptop revealed that the first son had leveraged the Biden family name to land a lucrative business deal with a Chinese energy conglomerate.
The communications also showed that Hunter introduced his father, then serving as vice president, to a Burisma Holdings executive months before Biden Sr. pressured officials in kyiv to fire an investigator probing the Ukrainian natural gas company. .
Stay up to date with today’s most important news
Stay up to date on the latest with Evening Update.
Hunter Biden served on the board of directors of Burisma Holdings from 2014 to 2019 and earned an annual salary of approximately $1 million despite having no relevant experience in the energy industry.
The FBI told Twitter the laptop was real on Oct. 14, 2020, the same day The Post published its first report, even as the social media platform censored the story and blocked access to America’s favorite tabloid. of your account for allegedly violating their terms of service regarding pirated materials.
Former Twitter executives later admitted in congressional testimony that it had been a “mistake” to block access to stories about the so-called “laptop from hell.”
Goldman also sought to downplay the federal government’s efforts to censor Americans’ free speech online, arguing that the actions were taken by social media platforms due to terms of service violations.
“You would agree that these flags, that the systematic flags that you saw, were flagged for a violation of the social media company’s terms of service, right?” he asked “Twitter Files” journalist Matt Taibbi.
“Sometimes, but sometimes in the case of instances like that of Congressman [Thomas] mass [R-Ky.]They were actually true information,” Taibbi responded.
“And then the social media company has to determine if… it’s actually a violation of their terms of service. And in 87% of those flags, they were not removed,” Goldman said.
Subcommittee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) later intervened to highlight the absolute clarity of First Amendment protections under the United States Constitution.
“[T]The systematic flags you saw were flagged for a violation of the social media company’s terms of service, right? Goldman asked journalist Matt Taibbi. wire image
“’Congress will take no action to limit free speech,’” Jordan said. “Mr. Shellenberger, is 13% censorship still censorship?
“Absolutely,” Shellenberger responded.
“And the other 87% is what we call the chilling effect that the courts have long recognized,” Jordan added. “That’s the problem.”
“By the way, part of the operation, Congressman Goldman, was to change the conditions of service,” Shellenberger also noted. “35% of URLs…were tagged as deleted or temporarily blocked. “All of those are forms of censorship.”
“But 65% weren’t,” Goldman interjected. “So how can the government be so coercive?”
Subcommittee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) later intervened to highlight the absolute clarity of First Amendment protections under the United States Constitution. AP
“Does the First Amendment say the government can censor 35%?” Shellenberger asked.
“It’s not the First Amendment. “It’s the terms of service, like you said, and they’re pointing it out for the social media companies to make their own decisions,” Goldman added.
“Congressman, you are a lawyer. You know the four federal judges have already ruled that…” Taibbi began, referencing court decisions that had blamed federal agencies for infringing on Americans’ free speech online.
“And I know it’s on appeal to the Supreme Court right now,” Goldman interjected, drawing laughter from the panel’s witnesses.
The high court agreed to hear Missouri v. Biden next year, which will determine whether the Biden administration violated the First Amendment by pressuring social media platforms to remove protected speech deemed false or misleading.
Categories: Trending
Source: vtt.edu.vn