zlacker

>>GavCo+(OP)
Aside from people in tech and the MAGA crowd, does anyone actually care about the "Twitter Files" stuff?

>>mikece+23
You may not mind it because you're side won. But that is incredibly short-sided. What if the FBI decides to sway an election to a candidate you don't support sometime in the future? See where this is going?

>>starkd+ff
Yeah, like what if one of the parties had their emails hacked by a foreign state, and then a week or so before the election, against their own policy, the FBI issued a press release about how they were urgently reopening an investigation not into the hack but into possible wrongdoing by the hacked candidate? And then later acknowledged there was no wrongdoing?

You're right; I really hate to think about what the fallout would be if the FBI inappropriately swayed an election.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controve...

>>hairof+Dh
But the FBI was not actively hacking the emails. You are really just proving my point about the FBI unnecessarily involving itself in these issues. They are supposed to be impartial. That's this story should be taken seriously from a bipartisan perspective.

>>starkd+mk
Looks like in this election their meddling was bipartisan, one of Taibbi's very own examples was jokingly intended to mislead GOP voters.

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1603857581503569929

>>Apocry+Nl
Not everything is a partisan. The FBI should not be asking Twitter to take down accounts. Period. These accounts he cited were low-follower accounts that were doing nothing illegal or immoral. This is a threat to everyone, no matter what side of the fence you are on. How is that so difficult to understand?

>>starkd+5I
Some of them were posting the wrong election date. I personally think that crosses into immoral territory.