When Clegg “countered that removing content like that would represent a significant incursion into traditional boundaries of free expression in the US,” Slavitt disregarded the warning and the First Amendment.
83
1,718
50
9,074
What happened next? Facebook panicked. In another April 2021 email, Brian Rice, Facebook’s VP of public policy, raised the concern that Slavitt's challenge felt “very much like a crossroads for us with the [Biden] White House in these early days.”
39
1,415
18
8,307
But Facebook wanted to repair its relationship with the White House to avoid adverse action: “Given what is at stake here, it would also be a good idea if we could regroup and take stock of where we are in our relations with the [White House], and our internal methods too.”
49
1,334
24
7,852
This wasn’t the first time that the Biden White House was angry that Facebook didn’t censor more. According to these documents, the Biden White House demanded to know why Facebook had not censored a video from @TuckerCarlson. So, Facebook prepped its response.
50
1,514
22
8,245
To appease the Biden White House, talking points were drafted for Clegg. Facebook was ready to tell the White House that it had demoted a video posted by Tucker Carlson by 50% in response to the White House’s demands, even though the post didn’t violate any policies.
129
2,196
79
10,013
On August 2, 2021, Facebook admitted it was going to change its policies because of pressure from the Biden White House.
48
1,211
18
7,104
August 2, 2021: “[Facebook’s] Leadership asked Misinfo Policy . . . to brainstorm some additional policy levers we can pull to be more aggressive against . . . misinformation. This is stemming from the continued criticism of our approach from the [Biden] administration.”
28
1,132
19
6,678
But it wasn't just the White House. Facebook also changed its policies in direct response to pressure from Biden's Surgeon General, censoring members of the “disinformation dozen.”
64
1,426
38
7,140
These documents, AND OTHERS that were just produced to the Committee, prove that the Biden Admin abused its powers to coerce Facebook into censoring Americans, preventing free and open discourse on issues of critical public importance.
72
1,346
36
7,467
Only after the Committee announced its intention to hold Mark Zuckerberg in contempt did Facebook produce ANY internal documents to the Committee, including these documents, which PROVE that government pressure was directly responsible for censorship on Facebook.

Jul 27, 2023 · 4:03 PM UTC

95
1,533
40
7,848
Based on Facebook’s newfound commitment to fully cooperate with the Committee’s investigation, the Committee has decided to hold contempt in abeyance. For now. To be clear, contempt is still on the table and WILL be used if Facebook fails to cooperate in FULL.
276
1,367
49
8,509
To be continued…
575
832
32
7,862
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
Can you explain why Facebook would want to withhold the internal documents proving they are being illegally manipulated against their will in secret by the government?
5
1
21
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
I had the pleasure of getting kicked off of the platform because of my activism against the clot shot. I still feel this was a government attempt at population control. Well it didn't work.
4
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
Directly responsible is an understatement— They used every single mean to direct ALL social media companies to do what THEY are NOT constitutionally able to do and used threats by unending letters, calls, intimidation tactics and anything else we can imagine, over and beyond the undeniable PROOF that emerged ONLY because @elonmusk DID go through with the Twitter (no X CORP) purchase and his WILLINGNESS to be the national HERO he’s been. Congress has little to no choice but to ACT on every possible level needed to PROTECT #FreeSpeech ENTIRELY as it’s been for over 247 years on this great nation. What are the simultaneous steps to be taken by ALL responsible House Committees to STOP these unending abuses?
1
18
1
76
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
Zuckerberg could have come clean right off the bat and said 'Look what our government is doing". But he didn't. Just like Twitter. That speaks volumes
3
7
75
The word to describe the tight coupling of Big Business and Big Government, especially for the purposes of political censorship, is fascism, aka corporatism.
3
11
1
30
GIF
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
This is unsettling, as I've used Facebook to try to raise awareness, in a hue and cry, against certain crimes (such as treason, genocide, etc.) being committed against us and am I'm afraid that I've been censored by this governmental pressure there, too. (Note: Twitter has been having some kind of glitch, unsolicited editing, shifting of words around, that has frustrated here, lately.)
4
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
Where's the proof???? If you have it, why don't you share it?
7
5
Replying to @Jim_Jordan
The guy donated $400M to "help election offices" in 2020. Pretty sure it didn't take much coercion.
1
8