Is Twitter “Breaking the Spirit” of Court Surveillance Ruling by Shadowbanning Whistleblowers? Tesla Case Study
September 2, 2020
Reuters in April, without much media fanfare, reported: Twitter Inc will not be able to reveal surveillance requests it received from the U.S. government after a federal judge accepted government arguments that this was likely to harm national security after a near six-year-long legal battle. Essentially this is saying that Twitter cannot tip off companies that they’re under a sealed DOJ criminal investigation when presented with a FISA warrant for Twitter surveillance. This ruling would be potentially good news if it wasn’t for companies knowing they can exploit and manipulate antiquated regulatory or federal loopholes like shadowbanning, to benefit corporate criminal activity.
And the fact DOJ refuses to create industry-specific Task Forces, comprised of former federal whistleblowers and low-level employees in engineering, regulatory/compliance, sales, and marketing, who were asked to execute fraud on behalf of the executives and boards, is part of the problem. Never is it more evident that these types of task forces are needed than when Congress or Senate asks questions of the tech industry at televised hearings. People with industry knowledge scream in frustration at the televisions and all over social media. Elected officials don’t know what they don’t know and could benefit from DOJ vetted tech industry-specific task forces including social media, autonomous driving, and medical devices. But the DOJ doesn’t make money preventing fraud, they only make money after fraud causes predictable and preventable death or harm. Elected officials want air-time for the image of change without having the substance to actually execute positive sustainable change. So here we are!
For example, the recent Twitter Hack exposed the long suspected use of shadowbanning tools used to silence those exposing negative truthful corporate & political information, which FYI, is not hateful conduct. While Twitter may not directly defy the court’s surveillance orders, nothing is preventing Twitter from breaking the “spirit of the court’s decision,” through shadowbanning for the benefit of one of their Twitter advertisers under a sealed DOJ criminal investigation. This type of information could and should be included in the scope of the DOJ’s argument and subsequent Judge’s decision. If they had such knowledge, but they don’t.
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey’s favorite Twitter user is $40 million SEC fraudster and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who also happens to be under a sealed DOJ criminal investigation, best estimated starting sometime in 2016. DOJ sealed federal investigations, despite many people wanting them to go faster, need evidence to support their claims to convene a grand jury, obtain arrest warrants and indict on criminal charges. On the lower-end, that takes about five years and the higher-end around a decade. Trust, no one, and I mean absolutely no one wants the investigation to end more than the sealed whistleblowers. Ehh maybe outside the FBI whistleblower handler and U.S. Assistant Attorney General.
August 5, 2016 NHTSA, NTSB & SEC for the first time request information from Tesla, disclosed in $TSLA‘s 10-K.
— KillingMyCareer (@MelaynaLokosky) February 18, 2020
The First Amendment protects truthful speech, but as the Supreme Court pointed out in Illinois v. Telemarketing Associates, it “does not shield fraud.”
This website has repeatedly exposed how corrupt people representing corrupt companies have tried to weaponize Free Speech and the First Amendment. Social media users exposing fraud via fact-based evidence for the safety and protection of others should be protected under the First Amendment; however, it’s just another example of antiquated federal laws being exploited for the protection of corporate criminal activity. So, when self-described champions of Free Speech and the First Amendment, whether in the startup medical device industry or social media titans, eventually finally lose that argument in an exhausting and expensive federal legal battle, culminating in executive criminal convictions, they’ll inconsistently and laughably contradict themselves cowardly hiding under the 5th Amendment.
That said, Twitter’s Free Speech argument is far from over. And the shadowbanning argument as it relates to the First Amendment is just getting started.
Part II: #WhiteKnighting Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey Shadowbanning against whistleblowers for Tesla #SerialKillerCEO Elon Musk