Congress, Free Speech, Media

“Always Risky to Attack Members of Congress”: Reporter Warns Musk Not to Run Afoul of Democratic Members

Twitter LogoIn a stark warning from a reporter, Politico’s Sam Stein weighed into a dispute over the verification of a fake account for Senator Ed Markey (D., Mass.), who has demanded answers from Elon Musk. Liberals are using such verification problems to attack Musk for threatening to restore free speech protections to Twitter. When Musk mocked Markey’s letter, Stein ominously warned that it is “[a]lways risky to attack members of congress. Especially risky with Dems assured of Senate power. Curious play by Musk here. He has many interests before Congress.” For many of us, it was a chilling message coming from a reporter that you would be wise not to risk the ire of powerful politicians.

Markey himself made no effort to hide the opportunistic use of the verification error to pressure Musk not to reduce Twitter’s massive censorship program. He declared

“I’m asking for answers from @elonmusk who is putting profits over people and his debt over stopping disinformation. Twitter must explain how this happened and how to prevent it from happening again.”

The use of “debt” to describe the obligation to censor is fascinating in this context. Many of us have long criticized the alliance of Twitter censors with Democratic members and groups. Recently, evidence emerged of back channels between government officials with social media companies. The allegations raise the concern over what I have called censorship by surrogate.

In one telling hearing, tech CEOs appeared before the Senate to discuss censorship programs. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey apologized for censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story, but then pledged to censor more people in defense of “electoral integrity.”

Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, however, was not happy. He was upset not by the promised censorship but that it was not broad enough.

He noted that it was hard to define the problem of “misleading information,” but the companies had to impose a sweeping system to combat the “harm” of misinformation on climate change as well as other areas. “The pandemic and misinformation about COVID-19, manipulated media also cause harm,” Coons said. “But I’d urge you to reconsider that because helping to disseminate climate denialism, in my view, further facilitates and accelerates one of the greatest existential threats to our world.

Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal also warned that he and his colleagues would not tolerate any “backsliding or retrenching” by “failing to take action against dangerous disinformation.” He demanded “the same kind of robust content modification” from the companies – the new Orwellian term for censorship.

Others have sought even more “robust” action. For years, Democratic leaders, including President Joe Biden, have called for corporate censorship on a variety of subjects.

I understand if Stein is trying to note that corporations are generally more solicitous to senators. Moreover, while the verification issue is being used unfairly to pressure Musk into restoring censorship policies, Musk should not make light of a fake account controversy raised by any user. However, the comment suggests that Musk should cut Markey slack because Musk’s own “interests” may be impacted through retaliation by the Massachusetts senator.

Stein’s warning comes at a time when journalists are apoplectic about free speech protections being restored on social media. Former Politico magazine editor Garrett Graff summed up the collective vapors succinctly: “Be afraid, be actually afraid.”

Now, however, journalists appear to be shifting to make Musk afraid, very afraid, of what awaits him if he confronts powerful Democrats or allows a greater diversity of viewpoints on Twitter. While some of us believe that it is good to “risk” criticism of powerful leaders in a democracy, Stein cannot understand why Musk would take such a risk, even as figures like Markey try to coerce him to restore censorship on Twitter.

The message does not appear to be sinking into Musk but there is clearly hope that repetition will finally scare the billionaire to heed the demands for censorship:

101 thoughts on ““Always Risky to Attack Members of Congress”: Reporter Warns Musk Not to Run Afoul of Democratic Members”

      1. Remember the good old days when misogynist womanizers like the Lion of the Senate, Ted Kennedy and his Democrat pals would have drunken lunches and waitress sandwiches?

        Yeah, but Republicans are misogynists and racists. Please.

  3. I wonder if Musk just figures if he goes full MAGA/QAnon and then whenever he goes before Congress he will get Republican Congressmen to run interference for him and let his companies do whatever they want.

    One thing is for sure he is not running a politically neutral site, and the Republicans both in Congress and on this site know it.

    1. One thing is for sure he is not running a politically neutral Pro-Marxist Democrat site….

      regards to Peter Shill

    2. One thing is for sure he is not running a politically neutral site, and the Republicans both in Congress and on this site know it.

      Of course when Twitter normalized censorship of conservatives, it was guaranteed that any effort to restore the voice of conservatives would be portrayed as a partisan attack against the Left. One thing is for sure he is not running a politically neutral site, and the Republicans both in Congress and on this site know it.

      Stein ominously warned that it is “[a]lways risky to attack members of congress. Especially risky with Dems assured of Senate power

      I don’t believe Stein should be criticized for stating what is arguable a true statement. Criticize him for accepting the abuse of power as normal.

    3. “One is for sure he is not running a politically neutral site,”

      I don’t know what Musk will bring to Twitter, but I doubt it will be worse than what we saw before .I want Twitter politically neutral, so if you are serious and have information, show it. All too many talk a good story but fail when having to prove their case.

      I don’t think Musk has shown a significant bias either way. Prove me wrong.

  4. “[a]lways risky to attack members of congress. Especially risky with Dems assured of Senate power.”

    The D’s once again channeling their inner Stalin.

    It’s always helpful when they declare the quiet part out loud: You are a political “criminal.”

  5. Is this the same Sam Stein that worked for MSNBC? If so I suggest you check the guy out and then see what passes for journalists these days. This is the same guy that thought the world was ending when Trump defended himself against partisan hacks like Jim Acosta.

    I repeat, please check this guy out and then just imagine that this little creepy guy wants to be able to control the American people. Twerp!

  6. There is nothing more ridiculous than to paint Musk as a champion of free speech! He’s a champion of chaos and his own speech. On an allegedly legal thread as this used to be it is sad for “free speech” to be constantly thrown about. Musk has made it very clear that anyone who doesn’t pay the proper amount of deference to him won’t be welcome on Twitter. Of course as he owns the platform now, that is his right. He’s made it clear that he welcomes all right wing and Russian, to name a few, misinformation purveyors. As a result, I understand why he is being embraced by some.

    Our right to free speech deals with the government’s power to silence us. It does not deal with a corporation’s right to decide who or what it will allow on its private platform. Of course as we continue to allow billionaires to buy up each and every media outlet, they may seem like the government but they aren’t not yet anyway.

    Musk is no saint and he is no champion of free speech or democracy.

    1. JH, you are ignoring all the evidence, collected through discovery in the Missouri lawsuit, that many government agencies have directed censorship on social media platforms, including Twitter. You are also ignoring the Texas law that treats large social media platforms as common carriers that cannot engage in viewpoint censorship. That law was recently upheld by the 5th Circuit.

      1. So because a state wants to take private property for public use, that is fine? What happened to freedom? Actually, I have an answer to that. The Repos are interested only in freedom their way. Idaho is a classic example. A city wants to determine where parking garages should be. No way says the state legislature, do it our way. Abortion is another great example. Do it our way says the Repos, but first talk to your local government representative about your reproductive choices. Parental choice in the books in your local school? BS, What about parents that want those banned books in the school? Choice, excuse me? It is choice my way or the highway say the Repos.

        Governments had an interest in accurate information on the internet. Is it censorship to ask twitter to take down all the misinformation about vaccines? Sure it’s censorship, but the misinformation is causing deaths in the local population. But the Repos showed under trump that they have no interest in societal well being. It is only the well being of trump that matters.

        Twitter is dead, Musk may be a brilliant person, but to not realize that anonymous free speech on the internet would lead to bullying, racist comments, outright lies about historical events. Well, he deserves to loose his $44B.

      2. Thanks for saying it Danny.
        I am astounded by the total mind mush of lies and ignorance by some nonsense filled arrogant claiming he is a judge of anything, it’s absolutely horrifying. Removed all doubt with one post, forever.

  8. On Sunday Markey tweeted in response to Musk’s “parody” remark: “Fix your companies. Or Congress will.” It also turns out that Markey gave permission to the reporter’s impersonation of his account.

    Democrats are now brazen in their abuse of power.

  9. I am reminded of another great stalwart of illiberalism, Chuck Schumer a democrat from another one of our illustrious far northeastern states, when he warned Donald Trump that the Deep State has “six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.” It seems as though some high-and-mighty politicos have enormous affinity for the ultimate rulers of the state. Go figure.

    1. Sen. Chuck Schumer’s remarks were, obviously, off the record according to sources familiar with these matters and other various intelligence analysts and experts.

      *always thought Clapper and Brennan, the top [knowable] intelligence officials in the land, lying to the Senate Intelligence Oversight Commitee sounded suspiciously rather ‘coup’-like.

      *i.e. perhaps the ‘ultimate rulers of the state’?

  10. You will speak to Democrat Senators with respect or else! And who are the authoritarian fascists again?

  11. It has now been verified by the elections of 2020 and 2022, that Republicans will never win the Senate in midterms, nor the White House. Obama weaponized DOJ, FBI, DHS, State Department, and other agencies by about 2012. He passed a law to allow the press to be the propaganda of the thought of the leftist owners of 90% of that collective press.

    Since January 6, 2021, hundreds of subpoenas and investigations have been executed upon the populist wing of the Republican Party which is anti-corruption.

    I don’t see how to turn back the clock on this level of pervasive tyrannical corruption.

    1. Does the 2nd Amendment “Freedom of Press” give the owners and managers of these media, immunity to treason charges?

  14. Tell that the the Propagandist LEFT WING reporters who ALWAYS attack people on the right that are in Congress. Freaking Hypocrites, can’t even see that THEY do exactly what they warn US that WE can’t or they will attack us, and MAYBE throw us in their DC gulag??? The way it is going, nothing will surprise me anymore.

  15. Should the owner of twitter be mocking twitter users with legitimate complaints?

    That seems to be the gist here. Musk spends a lot of time mocking Democratic politicians and promoting Republican ones while purporting to running a politically neutral site.

    1. Perhaps it could be that only the Left is attacking Musk? If a Republican politician attacked in the same manner, do you really believe Musk’s response would be different?

  18. Always Risky to Attack Members of Congress!

    That’s nothing. Old hat ‘comparative negligence’. I recall sitting Sen. Chuck Schumer informing President Trump ‘the IC (intelligence community) has six ways from Sunday getting you’.

    Which raises the question: who the fu*k is in charge around here?

    *IC retorts: We Are.

    1. –And how about Schumer threatening SCOTUS? (to which Chief Justice Roberts responded per statement:
      “Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All members of the court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.”) https://nypost.com/2020/03/05/schumers-scotus-threat-was-truly-unprecedented-then-he-made-it-worse/

  20. isn’t fascism awesome! Where using free speech against a Democrat….leads to banishment and long prison sentences?
    Fight while you still can…we are Germany 1930’s and the socialist fascists are consolidating power! There is too much power in DC…that can be BOUGHT by foreigners, wall street, etc
    Until that is reduced we are to enjoy Machiavellianism

Comments are closed.