November 29, 2023
Jack Smith wants to know if you ever 'liked' any tweet by Trump
By Monica Showalter
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/202...t_by_trump.html

If there's any doubt that the creatures currently persecuting President Trump through the courts are less after him than they are us, prosecutor Jack Smith provides the assurances.

Here's his latest stunt:

REPORT: The Department of 'Justice' demanded that Twitter (X) hand over a list of users who engaged with Donald Trump's posts in relation to Jack Smith's J6 investigation.

This means many of you may have been targeted.

Smith demanded Twitter provide data on "all lists of… pic.twitter.com/YSiW6XsV0a
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) November 29, 2023



It's as outrageous a demand as any ever seen in an outrageous case, with horrible implications for Constitutional protections and freedom itself in the U.S.

If this creep gets what he wants, that means everyone who ever clicked "like" on a tweet by President Trump during his years in office now has become a legal target, a dossier, a part of some database, easily searched for easy pinning for whatever the plug-in-the-crime this Vishinsky-wannabe can come up with. U.S. citizens will have no legal protections.

This sounds so Soviet it can't be real. But of course, it is, and it tells us a lot about the low quality of Smith's case and what it's about.

After all, a "like" is no proof of liking anything -- many people click 'like' idly without too much thought or else use the 'like' button to be able to come back to the tweet for whatever reason, a easy bookmark of sorts, a quick substitute for the more cumbersome, multi-click bookmark function on the platform. Maybe they 'like' the negative comments -- it simply offers no proof that they liked the tweet or agreed with it.

But even if they did click 'like' because they liked, do the users not have the right to 'like' a tweet by a duly elected president of the United States without ending up in a prosecutor's database? This isn't the Taliban or Mexico's cartels, where a 'like' might mean something, though for the same reasons described above, it proves nothing.

What happens to this database after Smith is done with it? Does it get leaked to Media Matters or NewsGuard or the Stanford Observatory, the Democrats' incipient censors? Leaks are very common in this prosecution of Trump and they all come from the prosecutorial side. Don't tell us this data will be protected.

And since Twitter is public, why the hell can't Smith do his own searches without harassing Twitters (now 'X's) owner, Elon Musk for company data? -- excerpt, rest at link above --

Quote: Isailedaway wrote in post #2

---

Solidifies that one should not do social media

---

Quote: Tinker wrote in post #5

---

Quote: Isailedaway wrote in post #4

---

Quote: Sanguine wrote in post #3

---

Quote: Isailedaway wrote in post #2

---

Solidifies that one should not do social media

---

I'll be d****d if they think they can limit my God-given right to free speech.

---

Unfortunately, we no longer have free speech.

Even a kid wearing face paint is branded a racist even though his ancestors wore similar paint.

---

We no longer have it because so many have become too weak and docile to use it.

---

See here for the "why" of it: Putting it Together – The Forced Metadata Demand Inside the Jack Smith Court Order – They are Showing us The Govt Battlespace for 2024 and What We Will Face

KanekoaTheGreat@KanekoaTheGreat
https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/stat...777144610152490

Shellenberger: We discovered DHS employees volunteering to use psyops and disinformation tactics against the American people

They blamed social media platforms for Trump's election victory in 2016.

So they used tactics developed abroad by the U.S. military and turned them against the American people.

"They used these tactics in order to change the conversation online and engage in mass censorship, which is what we saw with the Twitter files, the Facebook files, and of course, is now part of the Missouri versus Biden case."

James Baker, the FBI’s former general counsel who worked in the same role at Twitter, overrode the company's recommendations to censor the New York Post story about the Hunter Biden laptop.

"What we saw was an effort by existing FBI agents and former FBI officials to spread disinformation about the Hunter Biden laptop and say outright to the American people that it was a Russian hack and leak operation.

And of course, Biden repeated this in the debates."

@shellenberger

VIDEO at link. Short and succinct.