zlacker

> Twitter can always say no to the feds

I can also say no to the feds if they ask me to assassinate someone but it doesn’t mean they aren’t breaking a law by asking me.

Would be a crazy constitutional loophole if the govt simply needs to ask citizens to censor each other (1a), steal their neighbors guns (2a), tell husbands to prevent their wives from voting (19a), etc.

If these censorship request were about bomb threats or something that’s one thing, but they are mostly just spicy political takes. FBI needs to stay in their lane.

>>devmun+(OP)
Would it be any different if those FBI agents, after work, hit the report button from personal accounts?

>>Apocry+i
Personal accounts in your own time and not in any way as a representative of the US govt, and tax payer dollars aren’t paying for my time? Seems more reasonable to me. Especially if it isn’t a regular thing. a good question for a court to decide.

>>devmun+(OP)
> If these censorship request were about bomb threats or something that’s one thing, but they are mostly just spicy political takes.

There’s some selection bias here — the tweets we see in the thread are the ones twitter didn’t remove and the accounts twitter didn’t ban.

Twitter surely has the deleted tweets around somewhere, but it doesn’t seem to have been provided to the twitter files reporters.

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1603857596112330758

>>paulgb+9l
Twitter’s data model stores Tweets as a stream of records. When you delete a tweet, it stores another record which consumers are required to honor saying that the first record’s ID was deleted.

Twitter’s internal tools still have all of that data. In most cases the Internet Archive also does, too, which is how people have confirmed that, for example, the tweets in the famous “handled” email were nudes in violation of the non-consensual policy with no overriding news value.