know from the twitter file. but you said that you don t have any specific or unique knowledge of twitter, but you spoke as if you did you were s asked very specific questions te about twitter s the way twitterr functions and the decision making that they that they make. but yet you don t haveg th anyey unique or special knowledge jus about twitter and have never worked for them. and so this is onlnion wouy just your opinion, would you say, as a twitter account user? o in analysis based on facts are in m the public domain. and i was really referring to what i was asked about reclaiming my time. legal analysis is another word for opinion. oh, boy. fox news contributor turle jonathan turley joins us nowtimt with his response, reliving it in real time with us. doi professor, she wasn t even a key. she wasn t accusing you evenr hf not doing your homework. she s sabil because you didn t o work for twitter. e noor you re not a tech execut. you re not qualified. did you see that kind of line o
relationship existedly, that s the only that s a really the sad takeaway from the hearing. for us these are very serious allegations for us all. yeahll, the the united states government is not allowed to engage in censorship, but wee have at least 80 different employees that may have been ce, participating and identifying citizens to be censore bd to be suspended, to be banned. it got so intense that twitter i employees complained about it and said thaart they are pushin, and probing everywhere. that s a quote. so we should be concerned about our government and the businesso of silencing citizens. pee but there was not even peep oflo objection coming from the democrats. wa tell you, i was surprised.u, i was you know, the poll ames show tha the american people want to investigate whetherte f the t fbi is engaged ino they political activities, but also they want to investigate censorship. but suddenly the democratiocratc
and , you know, with with with my questioning, it waswhatd just sort of otherworldly. the question to me was, whattwi these twitter files say abouwht censorship by surrogate, which is what i was testifying on andw what i talked about.itte the case law. has those are twitter files. the the twitter files has twitter has confirmed the authenticity of those files. efore,the day before. former twitter officials confirm any of these factsan. and the members simply asked, what is this say about, yo censorship? u ner woand the response here w well, you ve never worked fory twitter. it s likone wouldn t testify in the pentagon papers unless i worked at the pentagon. it. you re right. you re right. they never should have published it because they didn t work at the pentagon to begi i n with .e an so it is it is reallyf an fascinating. was there any part of any democrat that, you know,u the party of the aclu, whicht ci was supposed to be about civil e liberties and free speech? i mean, i ve l
here.d greg, you heard what jonathan turley had to say. when one side of the aisleo is so overwhelming in reflexively defending the weaponization, what changesp can you hope for? well, i think the only remedy here is to expose a malign behavior of government agencies like the fbi clearlyga engaged.joha jonathan turley calls in turt censorship by surrogate. i call it censorship by proxy. it s pretty much the same thing. you know, h the united states supreme court has repeatedly and consistently said thaovernment agencyt a govy like the fbi cannot direct or encourage private citizens or o private entities, a companye like twitter to to do that.t and that the first amendment prohibits the government from doing. that s a violatio n of the constitution. theree are a couple of remedies.s