Linda Yaccarino is leaving X

Yes, it did. Every large platform including Twitter was censoring its users due to state pressure. Even Facebook has since admitted that they were told to censor information that was true, and they knew to be true.

You mean the story about Hunter Biden's laptop? That story? About Hunter Biden supposedly selling access to the president?

I find it odd now that Trump is in office and has the entirety of the government to investigate corruption in the executive office he's suddenly gone silent about that.

I guess that means that the executive office is now free of any taint of corruption!

X censors journalists and media handles regularly in India

Biden issued a full and unconditional pardon for his son for any crimes during a 10 year period 2014-2024. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3dx9n3m9y2o He later pardoned other family members and political allies.

That was disappointing but understandable, considering who was following him into office.

The Hunter Biden corruption story was true in the sense it was old school genteel corruption that virtually everybody in politics does: trade on their connections with promise of getting deals done and/or a veneer of legitimacy. It's a problem worthy of scrutiny but only if it is done across party lines.

But this misses the entire point: the whole part about the Hunter Biden laptop story was to paint Joe Biden as crooked and was being done solely as negative campaigning. That's it, and it is self evident in how the story dropped once it was no longer useful for that means.

But the millions of Americans who were outraged by this supposed corruption are just fine with it when it's done by their Dear Leader.

That in a nutshell summarizes the "values" of the modern American conservative movement.

They don't just censor, they limit organic influences. Your content won't get displayed more than n times, so you can't get more popular than n views, unless the system selects you as today's lottery winner, in which case it will be (reported as)viewed trillion times.

The only defense against this is the fact that Twitter users know system too well for this to be not immediately obvious.

And Fauci. Why would he do that?

What are you basing this on? Because:

https://www.carolinapoliticalreview.org/editorial-content/20...

> the report shows X’s dedication to content moderation by suspending millions of accounts and removing harmful posts, which could potentially help rebuild trust among users concerned with safety and dangerous behavior. On the other hand, this increased moderation contradicts Musk’s earlier promise of promoting free speech, something he has been very vocal about, potentially alienating users who see X becoming more restrictive.

Because the new administration promised an unhinged DOJ. Biden was already vindicated in these pardons once Trump dropped legitimate charges against Eric Adams to try and further his political agenda. That and arresting judges, starting political witch hunts, etc...

There was also AFAIK never any real evidence Hunter actually succeeded in doing anything of actual value for his clients. He was definitely going around representing that he could influence or get people meetings with his dad but there was never an actual tat from the Joe Biden side.

This is correct, as it's clear that if they had the goods they would have trumpeted the fact. But that didn't matter, it was simply the story itself that mattered (as the intended audience wants to be told what to think).

Again, that's not behavior that should be acceptable but it's SOP in politics by default.

What continues to blow my mind is that if "their guys" are corrupt they're totally fine with it. In my world, no corruption is acceptable corruption, regardless of who's doing it.

> And Fauci. Why would he do that?

Why would Fauci need that? It's not like he was getting death threats or anything like that. Oh, wait, he was.