After Elon Musk took-over Twitter, he threw the internal files open to a series of journalists. The resultant articles became the ‘Twitter Files’.

The information is now quite extensive, but the bottom line is that Twitter had been liaising closely with various government agencies (primarily the FBI) and the Biden team to suppress information that was detrimental to their agenda.

The most egregious of these issues was Hunter laptop. The FBI had the laptop for almost a year and knew that it was both valid and detrimental to Biden. (Polls have shown that up 5% of Biden voters would have changed their vote had they known the truth of the laptop). The FBI had already been working with Twitter prior to the release of the laptop’s contents, to endeavour to suppress it. This went from merely downgrading some tweets that mentioned the data to completely banning news organisations that had the temerity to publish it. OTOH, when 51 ex-FBI agents wrote that they thought the laptop was false (a claim most have now rescinded), Twitter worked hard to promote that as truth.

All this while the Twitter executives suspected that indeed the laptop was valid and knew that they were violating their own rules by suppressing it.

In addition, lines of communications were set up between Twitter, the FBI and senior Democrats to allow those Democrats to flag certain tweets as ‘unhelpful’, which Twitter operatives enthusiastically suppressed. The changing government positions on Covid and RussiaGate formed a goodly part of the Twitter efforts to help the Democrat talking points.

This wasn’t confined to Twitter. We know that the FBI was closely ensconced within Facebook and YouTube, each of which did their part to assist in the suppression of the Hunter laptop story. And evidence has abounded that Google searches are skewed to favour woke talking-points.

The First Amendment prohibits the government from suppressing speech or engaging in censorship. No such prohibition affects the private sector. But what happens when the private sector does the bidding of the government to suppress speech? This becomes uncomfortably close to classic corporate fascism.

Everything you said was spot on mhaze.
Except it isn't close to being fascism, IT IS fascism.
- and it's happening on an international scale.

It's not government working hand in hand with the private sector to do the bidding of the state.
- It's globalist elite working hand in hand with multinationals to do the bidding of the global elite for the entire planet.
Bilderberg has been going on since 1954, and now Klaus Schwab and his WEF Great Reset.

My God this is laughable.

Trump sacks the head of the FBI to halt a legitimate investigation into Russia's interference in the election and Trump's team's potential role in it and yet we are still banging on about a laptop?

Utterly zero understanding of what constitutes fascism from the RWNJ set.

"WASHINGTON — President Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved “great pressure” on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting.

“I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.” "

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html

Hi SteeleRedux,
What's this got to do with the Twitter files?
There was no Russian interference in the US election.
It was all made up, I can't believe people are still going on about this.
On the other hand, Biden and Democrats most definitely tried to influence the election.

After a witch hunt that would make McCarthyism look restrained, the Democrats and FBI came up with diddly squat against Trump.

Dear Armchair Critic,

Well you had better tell that to the FBI who still have wanted posters up.

"On July 13, 2018, a federal grand jury sitting in the District of Columbia returned an indictment against 12 Russian military intelligence officers for their alleged roles in interfering with the 2016 United States (U.S.) elections. The indictment charges 11 defendants, Boris Alekseyevich Antonov, Dmitriy Sergeyevich Badin, Nikolay Yuryevich Kozachek, Aleksey Viktorovich Lukashev, Artem Andreyevich Malyshev, Sergey Aleksandrovich Morgachev, Aleksandr Vladimirovich Osadchuk, Aleksey Aleksandrovich Potemkin, Ivan Sergeyevich Yermakov, Pavel Vyacheslavovich Yershov, and Viktor Borisovich Netyksho, with a computer hacking conspiracy involving gaining unauthorized access into the computers of U.S. persons and entities involved in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, stealing documents from those computers, and staging releases of the stolen documents to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election."

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/cyber/russian-interference-in-2016-u-s-elections