Mark Zuckerberg spills the beans about FBI involvement in censoring stories

Mark Zuckerberg saw fit to tell us what most of us already knew from experience - that Facebook actively censored the Hunter Biden laptop story in 2020 in lockstep with Twitter

In an appearance on Joe Rogan’s widely popular podcast, The Joe Rogan Experience, Facebook co-founder, Chairman, and CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted that the FBI had come to them not long after the New York Post broke the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop and its contents that seem to incriminate him and his father, President Joe Biden, in several white collar crimes, as well as Hunter Biden’s addictions to drugs and sex.

Rogan questions Zuckerberg about how Facebook handles controversial news items and relates it to how Twitter outright blacklisted any mention of the Hunter Biden story after suspending the New York Post from their platform to limit the story’s reach before asking Zuckerberg,” So you guys censored that as well?”

Zuckerberg then proceeds to answer in a long-winded manner, stating,” So we took a different path than Twitter. I mean, basically the background here is the FBI … came to us [Facebook]. [The FBI] was like,‘ Hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert.’ …We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice. That basically there's about to be some kind of dump [that's] similar to that. So just be vigilant.”

It was then that Zuckerberg started to describe the difference in Facebook’s approach as opposed to the approach that Twitter elected to take when handling the Hunter Biden story. In Zuckerberg’s assessment, he states — correctly, I might add — that Twitter’s approach was a total blackout of the story, censoring the original source and any reposts, as they had literally suspended the New York Post’s Twitter account right after the story broke. Even posts done in video form were pulled down, seemingly manually. I know that for a fact because I had posted it myself in a video format, reading the story, and it stayed up maybe 2 hours before it was deleted.

Zuckerberg then differentiates between Twitter’s approach and Facebook’s approach, saying,” …if something is reported to us as potentially misinformation -- important misinformation, we also visited third-party fact-checking programs because we don't want to be deciding what's true and false. … I think it was five or seven days [while] it was basically being determined whether it was false, the distribution on Facebook was decreased, but people are still allowed to share it so you could still share it, you could still consume it…”

Decreased distribution is an understatement — I remember it well, you couldn’t share it without it getting blatantly covered by fact-checks that obfuscated the content, and it wouldn’t show up in any newsfeeds. If someone didn’t go directly to your Facebook page, it could not be seen. Groups were also moderated heavily at this time, and any posts in Facebook groups either got deleted under false pretenses by the moderators of said groups themselves or again suffered the fate of being obscured by intrusive fact-checks from sources that I can verify are biased and untrustworthy, but that’s another article that I will link later.

It’s here that I also have to interject to refute Zuckerberg’s assertion that the information on Hunter Biden’s laptop and the resulting story was unverified. The FBI had possessed the laptop since December of 2019 — 11 months prior to the 2020 Presidential election. There was more than enough time for one of the most prolific investigative agencies in the world to verify the authenticity of the information they had obtained. This is a blatant lie, either from Zuckerberg or the FBI themselves. It’s possible the FBI deceived Facebook by framing their request as a general warning to be on the lookout for misinformation related to the Hunter Biden laptop, which made them decide to significantly reduce the reach of any posts about it, even when posted by sources that have a large following, but I doubt it. With how coordinated the blanket censorship of this story that provably affected 2020 election results, it’s hard to believe they were deceived to this degree.

It was then that Joe Rogan interjects with an important question,” By what percentage?”

This, of course, was a question Zuckerberg claimed he couldn’t answer ‘off the top of his head’. Zuckerberg then reinforces his claim that Facebook allowed you to share the Hunter Biden story — again, technically not a lie but there was no point in sharing it with how restricted things were at that time.

Zuckerberg then proceeds to spew this nonsense,” So, depending on what side of the political spectrum [you are on] -- you think we didn't censor it enough or censored it way too much. But we weren't - sort of - as black and white about it as Twitter. We just kind of thought 'Hey, look, if the FBI -- which, I still view as a legitimate institution in this country, it's very professional law enforcement, they come to us and tell us that we need to be on guard about something... that I want to take that seriously.”

Zuckerberg apparently felt the need to suck up to the FBI at the end of his verbal diarrhea. That’s self-preservation, if ever I’ve seen it.

This is smoking gun evidence of the very same left-wing conspiracy Hunter Biden’s Stunt Double, Sam Harris, espoused that he ‘did not care’ about in his ill-received comments during his potentially career-ending appearance on the Triggernometry podcast.

What we have in the case of Facebook, Twitter, and even Sam Harris, is a concept called ‘repressive tolerance’. It involves being willing to either commit immoral acts or condone immoral acts for the sake of getting the desired result from your efforts and concessions. The ends justified the means to augment the attitudes of just enough people to get their desired result, which was Trump’s defeat in 2020.

This, of course, is what Time magazine was referring to in their piece about the 2020 election being ‘saved’ from Trump. Everything is okay as long as the institutional left gets their way. If the roles are reversed, though? Well… we saw proof of that in Trump’s impeachment over a supposed Ukraine quid pro quo when Biden was on video admitting to an actual quid pro quo where he protected his son from a prosecutor that was about to shoot holes in their criminal business deals.

With the midterm election a little over 2 months away, Twitter has already announced their plans to censor anything they don’t like in the run-up to November. At least they’re out front with it this time. This should be the time when anyone slighted by Big Tech’s iron grip on public discourse needs to be vocal about reforming section 230 so that they can’t engage in partisan censorship to influence political sentiments among the voting population.

Big Tech is once again planning to enforce their will on our election process. It doesn’t get much more fascist than that.

Thanks for reading, if you enjoyed this please subscribe here on Substack and follow my social media.