Democrat Leaders Just Lost Their Censorship Tool

( Democrats in Congress are starting to ramp up the attacks on Twitter owner Eon Musk for the various moves he’s making at the social media company he bought not long ago.

While appearing on CNN over the weekend, Democrat Adam Schiff, the current chair of the House Intelligence Committee, was speaking about the potential criminal charges against former President Donald Trump when he quickly shifted his focus to Musk.

He said that there is a “big problem right now with social media companies and their failure to moderate content and the explosion of hate on Twitter, the banning of journalists on Twitter.”

He then issued a thin threat saying that Twitter, and other social media platforms, might not continue to enjoy “immunity from responsibility and liability.”

Sounds like one of the leading Democrats is none too happy that Twitter won’t be propagating censorship in the same way that its previous regime did — to the benefit of liberals.

Earlier this week, Schiff along with three of his liberal colleagues wrote a warning letter to Nick Clegg, who serves as Meta’s president of global affairs. Schiff said that “as part of our ongoing oversight effort,” the Democrats wanted to reach out and warn Meta — the parent company of Facebook — that there would be dire consequences if they started proceeding down the same path Twitter is.

The letter read that “dangerous and unfounded election denial content” had to be kept off of the social media platform at all costs.

Jonathan Turley, a law professor, recently spoke to the New York Post, saying the letter is basically a “hold-the-line warning … meant to stop a cascading failure in the once insurmountable wall of social-media censorship. If Facebook were to restore free-speech protections, the control over social media could evaporate.”

A few weeks ago, Musk issued the release of the Twitter Files, which showed that the federal government and Twitter had been colluding to suppress dissent and censor Americans’ right to free speech.

One of the main subjects of this was the Hunter Biden laptop story, published by the Post and which Twitter banned. They even temporarily banned the Post’s Twitter account for a few weeks as a result of the posting.

Matt Taibbi wrote that Twitter basically acted as a “subsidiary” of the FBI, saying that the relationship between the social media platform and the federal law enforcement agency was like that of a “master-canine.”

There were 80 agents at the FBI who were working full time on analyzing and flagging content from Twitter users, then demanding to receive the location information for those users. They even demanded that Twitter itself take action against mainly “low-follower accounts belonging to ordinary Americans.”

Taibbi wrote wrote that the communications between Twitter and the FBI were “constant and pervasive.” He added:

“The FBI has agents — lots of them — analyzing and mass-flagging social media posts. Not as part of any criminal investigation, but as a permanent, end-in-itself surveillance operations. People should not be OK with this.”