關鍵在於公開，關鍵還在於她真的知道自己是人民的代表，是真正的議員，也就是真正的最高權力機關。無論是私人公司，還是政府，還是FBI都必須聽他們的質詢和問責。他們才是國家的主人。
我是很感動的。
========================
|
Lauren Opal Boebert (B): Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Colorado's 3rd district Yoel Roth Former Head of Trust & Safety at @Twitter Chairman: Five minutes Lauren Opal Boebert (B): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Matt, Taibi, a respected reporter who published much of the Twitter files said, "Twitter's contact with the FBI was constant and pervasive, as if it were a subsidiary." Now I want to better understand why he would suggest that. Mr. Roth, while at Twitter, how many meetings did you have with the FBI? ROTH: I couldn't say for sure, but LOB: more than 10? ROTH: That's the reason. LOB: More than 20? ROTH: I couldn't say for sure LOB: more than 50? ROTH: That seems a bit high. LOB: Many meetings with the FBI ! Well, we know… how many FBI agents worked at Twitter while you were there? ROTH: I don't believe any active FBI or … LOB: former FBI agents, how many worked there while you were there? ROTH: I'm aware of, perhaps two. LOB: Well, we know of at least nine… because they started the B.U. group chat, BU for Bureau. Now, Mr. Roth, did the FBI ever ask you to share information like user's communication data without going through proper legal channels? ROTH: No, they did not, and I would have refused if they had. LOB: That's correct. I see that you denied Agent Chan's request for access to Twitter's data feed. What's sick isn't that you would deny it, it's that the FBI would even ask you for the private data of American citizens without going through legal channels of the law. Now, I want to remind you, Mr. Roth, that you are under oath. Did the FBI ever ask you to do anything that was illegal or questionably legal? ROTH: I'm not a lawyer, but certainly not to the best of my recollection or knowledge. LOB: Now, from the hearing that I've been a part of today, it's almost impossible to tell where the FBI ends and where Twitter begins. We have Mr. Baker here, a former FBI agent, and there seems to be a revolving door between the FBI and Twitter itself. Even Mr. Baker said that there was no collusion with the federal government and Twitter, but Mr. Baker, that's you. You are the collusion between the federal government and the FBI. And now with this, this is such a problem because we're seeing censorship all over. Mr. Roth, Miss Gaddy, did either of you approve the shadow banning of my account at Lauren Bobert? Yes or no. ROTH: No, I did not. GADDY: no, To the best of my recollection. Well, let me refresh your memory because on March 12, 2021, and Mr. Roth, I know you looked at it because fascist Twitter 1.0 had a public interest exceptions policy, which means for members of Congress to be shadow banned, it had to go before you, Mr. Roth. So I'll ask again, did you shadow ban my account, yes or no? ROTH: Again, not to the best of my recollection. LOB: So the answer is, Mr. Roth, yes, you did. I found out last night from Twitter staff that you suppressed my account for this tweet. It's a freaking joke about Hillary Clinton being angry that she couldn't rig her election. It's a joke, but in response, being the sinister overlords that you all are, you placed a 90-day account filter so I could not be found. And now we see here that Twitter staff said the visibility filter on my account excluded me from top searches, prevented notifications for non-followers, and much more. This is considered an aggressive visibility filter. You silenced members of Congress from communicating with their constituents. You could have silenced me from communicating with the American people over a freaking joke. Now, who the hell do you think that you are? Election interference. Yeah, I would say that that was taking place because of you four sitting here, the Hunter Biden laptop story was suppressed, a sitting member of Congress was suppressed, a sitting president was banned from Twitter. You know, I bet that Putin is sitting in the Kremlin wishing he had as much election interference as you four here today. We've heard about threats to democracy, well what about shutting down a duly elected member of Congress? This is fundamental to our nation's governance and you all attacked that very foundation. 230 protections? Well, those are for Publishers, not for editors, and it's clear you are not acting as Publishers, you were acting as editors. And Mr. Chairman, I think it's far past time that we remove 230 protections for big tech platforms who are abusing this protection. Let me just say, I'm not angry for myself. I'm not angry because I was silenced. I can reach out to Elon and to his staff, and I can see what's happened, and I can sit here today and hold you all in account. I am angry for the millions of Americans who were silenced because of your decisions, because of your actions, because of your collusion with the federal government. They can't reach out to Elon, they can't sit here today and hold you into account. We don't know where the FBI ends and Twitter begins. Free speech and even Twitter, Mr. Chairman. I yield Chairman: the lady yields. Went over 24 seconds, I'll give Miss Porter 24 extra seconds."
|
Lauren Opal Boebert (B)：美國眾議院議員，來自科羅拉多州第三區 Yoel Roth 前@Twitter 信任與安全主管 主席：五分鍾 Lauren Opal Boebert（B）：謝謝主席先生。 發布了大部分 Twitter 文件的受人尊敬的記者 Matt, Taibi 說，“Twitter 與 FBI 的聯係持續不斷，無處不在，就好像它是一個子公司一樣。”現在我想更好地理解他為什麽會這樣建議。羅斯先生，在 Twitter 期間，您與 FBI 會麵了多少次？ 羅斯：我不能肯定地說，但是 LOB：超過10個？ 羅斯：因為這個… LOB：超過 20 個？ 羅斯：我不能肯定地說 LOB：超過50個？ 羅斯：這似乎有點高。 LOB：與聯邦調查局有許多會議！好吧，我們知道……當你在 Twitter 時，有多少 FBI 特工在 Twitter 工作？ 羅斯：我不相信任何活躍的聯邦調查局或…… LOB：前聯邦調查局特工，你在的時候有多少人在那裏工作？ 羅斯：我知道，也許有兩個。 LOB：嗯，我們知道至少有九個……因為他們開始了 B.U.群聊，BU就是局。現在，Roth 先生，FBI 是否曾要求您在不通過正當合法渠道的情況下共享用戶通信數據等信息？ 羅斯：不，他們沒有，如果他們有，我會拒絕。 LOB：沒錯。我看到你拒絕了特工 Chan 訪問 Twitter 數據源的請求。病態的不是你不肯，而是FBI都不通過法律的合法渠道向你索要美國公民的私人數據。 現在，羅斯先生，我想提醒您，您是宣誓了的。 FBI 有沒有要求你做任何非法或合法的事情？ 羅斯：我不是律師，但據我的記憶或所知肯定不是。 LOB：現在，從我今天參加的聽證會來看，幾乎不可能分辨出 FBI 的終點和 Twitter 的起點。我們這裏有 Baker 先生，他是前 FBI 特工，FBI 和 Twitter 本身之間似乎有一扇旋轉門。連貝克先生都說聯邦政府和推特沒有勾結，但是貝克先生，就是你。你是聯邦政府和聯邦調查局的勾結。現在有了這個，這就是一個問題，因為我們看到到處都是審查製度。 Roth 先生，Gaddy 小姐，你們中的任何一個人是否同意對我在 Lauren Bobert 的賬戶進行影子禁令？ 是，還是不是。 羅斯：不，我沒有。 加迪：沒有，據我所知。 好吧，讓我重溫一下你的記憶，因為在 2021 年 3 月 12 日，羅斯先生，我知道你看過它，因為法西斯推特 1.0 有一項公共利益例外政策，這意味著國會議員要被影子禁止，它必須走在你前麵，羅斯先生。所以我再問一遍，你有沒有影子禁止我的帳戶，是或否？ 羅斯：再一次，根據我的記憶，這不是最好的。 LOB：羅斯先生，答案是，是的，您做到了。昨晚我從 Twitter 工作人員那裏得知，你們禁止我發布這條推文的帳戶。希拉裏·克林頓 (Hillary Clinton) 因無法操縱選舉而生氣，這是一個荒謬的笑話。這是一個玩笑，但作為回應，你們都是陰險的霸主，你們設置了一個 90 天的帳戶過濾器，這樣我就找不到了。現在我們在這裏看到 Twitter 工作人員說我帳戶上的可見性過濾器將我排除在熱門搜索之外，阻止了非關注者的通知等等。這被認為是一種激進的可見性過濾器。你們迫使國會議員與他們的選民被沉默。你本可以讓我被禁聲，不讓我因為一個該死的笑話而與美國人民交流。現在，你到底以為你是誰？ 選舉幹涉？！是的，我會說這是因為你們四個坐在這裏而發生的，亨特·拜登筆記本電腦的故事被壓製了，一位現任國會議員被壓製了，一位現任總統被禁止使用推特。你知道，我敢打賭，坐在克裏姆林宮的普京希望他能像今天在座的你們四個人一樣受到選舉幹預。 我們都聽說過對民主的威脅，是的，那麽壓製一個合法選舉出來的國會議員到底算是什麽！？這是我們國家治理的基礎，你們都攻擊了這個基礎。 230條款保護？好吧，那些是給出版商的，不是給編輯的，很明顯你不是作為出版商，你是作為編輯。主席先生，我認為我們為濫用這種保護的大型科技平台取消 230 項保護的時間已經過去了。 我隻想說，我不是為自己生氣。我不生氣，因為我被壓製噤聲了。我可以聯係 Elon 和他的員工，我可以看到發生了什麽，我今天可以坐在這裏向你們所有人匯報。我為數百萬因你們的決定、你們的行動、你們與聯邦政府的勾結而被噤聲的美國人感到憤怒。他們無法聯係 Elon，他們今天不能坐在這裏讓你們負責。我們不知道 FBI 在哪裏結束，而 Twitter 又在哪裏開始。言論自由甚至推特。主席先生，我結束。 主席：女士結束了。超過 24 秒，我給波特小姐額外 24 秒。”
|
