Was reading that twitter very well could have some activities to hide from Americans, information that Elon would bring to light that many Democrats want kept hidden.
Has Elon Musk stumbled into some scandalous truths about Twitter?
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...nge_reaction_to_his_twitter_buyout_offer.html
excerpt:
....What Musk seems to have stumbled upon is the argument that Twitter's servers may well be owned by various governments, maybe the Saudis, but almost certainly the U.S. government.
This analysis by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse, who knows tech,
points to the oddities:
What Elon Musk appears to be doing is perhaps the biggest story that few understand.
I share this perspective having spent thousands of hours in the past several years deep in the weeds of tech operating systems, communication platforms, and the issue of simultaneous users. What Twitter represents, and what Musk is attempting, is not what most would think.
In the big picture of tech platforms, Twitter, as an operating model, is a massive high-user commenting system.
Twitter is not a platform built around a website; Twitter is a platform for comments and discussion that operates in the sphere of social media. As a consequence, the technology and data processing required to operate the platform does not have an economy of scale.
There is no business model where Twitter is financially viable to operate…. UNLESS the tech architecture under the platform was subsidized.
In my opinion, there is only one technological system and entity that could possibly underwrite the cost of Twitter to operate. That entity is the United States Government, and here’s why.
Sundance cites the monster data usage the system requires, with no economy of scale -- each new user adds costs, which Twitter seems impervious to. As its user base stagnates, it still makes money, because it avoids those costs. Musk noted the oddity of huge accounts with millions of followers who rarely tweet, asking if the website was "dead," which was a reasonable question, given the previous understanding of Twitter as an entity that makes money based on users to advertise to. This dynamic involving the federal government certainly would explain the absence of rivals to the company -- and perhaps the difficulties that Truth Social has had in scaling its operations. (I just got onto Truth Social this week after a long stretch on the 'waiting list.')
The other potential problem was brought up by Judicial Watch's Tom Fitton:
They've testified again and again and again before Congress that they never censor conservative users -- with
this kind of tripe:
Twitter isn’t swayed by political biases when making critical decisions, according to prepared remarks from CEO Jack Dorsey on Tuesday, one day before he’s set to testify in front of Congress.
“Let me be clear about one important and foundational fact: Twitter does not use political ideology to make any decisions, whether related to ranking content on our service or how we enforce our rules,” Dorsey said.
His
remarks were posted by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on Tuesday. Dorsey will address the committee, as well as the Senate alongside Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, on Wednesday. He’s expected to weigh in on recent claims Twitter that shadow-bans prominent conservative voices and is driven by left-leaning ideals.
“We believe strongly in being impartial, and we strive to enforce our rules impartially. We do not shadowban anyone based on political ideology,” Dorsey continued. “In fact, from a simple business perspective and to serve the public conversation, Twitter is incentivized to keep all voices on the platform.”
...and...
He argued it wouldn’t make business sense for Twitter to jettison large swaths of Republicans, viewing the platform as a new-age “public square” where almost anything should be allowed to be said. “Impartiality is our guiding principle,” Dorsey added.
Nevertheless, there are "mistakes," lots of "mistakes":
When asked why Twitter suspended conservative commentator Candace Owens for mimicking New York Times reporter Sarah Jeong’s contentious tweets, including “cancel white people,” Dorsey said it was a “mistake.”
Plus the
odd 'total mistake':
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey said Thursday it was a 'total mistake' for The New York Post to be locked out of its Twitter account for tweets sharing the newspaper's report on
Hunter Biden's emails.
'We made a total mistake with the New York Post, we corrected that within 24 hours,' Dorsey told House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, who had asked about that example. 'It was not to do with the content, it had to do with a hacked materials policy, we had an incorrect interpretation,' Dorsey added.
In this sense, they top the tobacco barons of yesteryear who declared under oath before Congress around 1994 to some Democrat show hearing that
nicotine was not addictive.
Musk may well find out the truth of Twitter's claims to probity, too -- which would end the nonsense right there, and could, of course, expose Twitter to shareholder lawsuits as any corporate lie to the public would.
The other thing he may expose is scarier:
Twitter shut down the president of the United States, which if it's controlled by the government, while the elites take the profits, it means the government itself shut Trump down. What would be the implications of that, and how the heck could this scandal be corrected? It would show the extent of the rot of the deep state that an entity so closely connected to the federal government could carry out that kind of coup. And that presents a Constitutional crisis. This kind of third-world behavior would have to be exposed by Musk -- and Congress would need to stop it.
