Special counsel Jack Smith’s team obtained a search warrant in January for records related to former President Donald Trump’s Twitter account, and a judge levied a $350,000 fine on the company for missing the deadline to comply, according to court documents released Wednesday.
X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, sent an automated reply to a request for comment, saying it would respond soon.
I believe it is to suppress a later retort that they weren't given a chance to respond. (Fau)X isn't painted in the best light in this article so writing something which is one sided, needs to...
I believe it is to suppress a later retort that they weren't given a chance to respond. (Fau)X isn't painted in the best light in this article so writing something which is one sided, needs to also establish that the author tried to give an opportunity to hear both sides.
Iirc, from the Twitter thread this decision was made in, the "we'll respond soon" reply is still a troll response. They still have no press team and do not ever plan to reply.
Iirc, from the Twitter thread this decision was made in, the "we'll respond soon" reply is still a troll response.
They still have no press team and do not ever plan to reply.
More info about this was revealed yesterday: Special counsel obtained Trump DMs despite ‘momentous’ bid by Twitter to delay, unsealed filings show ... ... This was in January and February. Musk's...
Ultimately, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell held Twitter (now known as X) in contempt of court in February, fining the company $350,000 for missing a court-ordered deadline to comply with Smith’s search warrant. But the newly unsealed transcripts of the proceedings in her courtroom show that the fine was the least of the punishment. Howell lit into Twitter for taking “extraordinary” and apparently unprecedented steps to give Trump advance notice about the search warrant — despite prosecutors’ warnings, backed by unspecified evidence, that notifying Trump could cause grave damage to their investigation.
...
The bulk of the battle focused on prosecutors’ demand that Twitter abide by a “nondisclosure” order and refrain from notifying Trump about the search warrant prosecutors had obtained. Twitter raised concerns that prosecutors were seeking data that could be covered by executive privilege — a contention that drew incredulous responses from both prosecutors and the judge, who said Trump was unlikely to be doing government business with senior aides via Twitter DM.
...
Prosecutors emphasized repeatedly that they had evidence — not just based on public information — that disclosing the search warrant to Trump could jeopardize their probe.
This was in January and February. Musk's acquisition of Twitter took effect in late October last year.
It's unclear to me what they mean by "the fine was the least of the punishment." What was the other punishment?
I'm also unsure if Twitter actually disclosed something to Trump about the search warrant, or just argued in court that they should be allowed to do that.
Sucks that the DOJ can't just log in and download whatever they want anymore... those were the good ol' days where the good angelic folks from DC could manage the discourse and see the private...
Sucks that the DOJ can't just log in and download whatever they want anymore... those were the good ol' days where the good angelic folks from DC could manage the discourse and see the private messages of users... why can't we go back to that sorta system?
DOJ != NSA. Do you really think the 3-letter agencies stopped their mass surveillance after Snowden? The intelligence community absolutely can intercept and catalog whatever they want to see, but...
DOJ != NSA.
Do you really think the 3-letter agencies stopped their mass surveillance after Snowden? The intelligence community absolutely can intercept and catalog whatever they want to see, but that doesn't mean they will share it with DOJ or that it would be admissible as evidence in any eventual trial.
I believe it is to suppress a later retort that they weren't given a chance to respond. (Fau)X isn't painted in the best light in this article so writing something which is one sided, needs to also establish that the author tried to give an opportunity to hear both sides.
The thing is, that's the standard, but it's not Twitter's standard under Musk. That standard was a poop emoji auto-reply and nothing else.
They changed it maybe a month ago (now) or so to they'll respond soon.
Journalistic due diligence. It's a good thing even if twitter doesn't respond.
Iirc, from the Twitter thread this decision was made in, the "we'll respond soon" reply is still a troll response.
They still have no press team and do not ever plan to reply.
More info about this was revealed yesterday:
Special counsel obtained Trump DMs despite ‘momentous’ bid by Twitter to delay, unsealed filings show
...
...
This was in January and February. Musk's acquisition of Twitter took effect in late October last year.
It's unclear to me what they mean by "the fine was the least of the punishment." What was the other punishment?
I'm also unsure if Twitter actually disclosed something to Trump about the search warrant, or just argued in court that they should be allowed to do that.
Interesting if musk will be dumb enough to cause a two for one by trying to stone wall the DOJ
Sucks that the DOJ can't just log in and download whatever they want anymore... those were the good ol' days where the good angelic folks from DC could manage the discourse and see the private messages of users... why can't we go back to that sorta system?
DOJ != NSA.
Do you really think the 3-letter agencies stopped their mass surveillance after Snowden? The intelligence community absolutely can intercept and catalog whatever they want to see, but that doesn't mean they will share it with DOJ or that it would be admissible as evidence in any eventual trial.