Democratic California Rep. Ro Khanna criticized Twitter and Facebook for censoring the New York Post’s story on Hunter Biden, saying the story should not have been blocked.
“I thought it was a mistake for Twitter to take down some of this stuff about Hunter Biden, or Facebook to do that,” Khanna said during an interview with Joe Lonsdale on the American Optimist podcast while promoting his book “Dignity in a Digital Age: Making Tech Work for All of Us.”
The New York Post published a story in October 2020 detailing a meeting between Hunter Biden, then-Vice President Joe Biden and a top executive at Ukrainian gas company Burisma in 2015, relying on data recovered from a laptop reportedly belonging to Hunter. Shortly after the story was published, Twitter blocked users from sharing the link and suspended accounts that attempted to tweet it out.
Amid growing bipartisan agreement that increased regulation of social media platforms and their content moderation policies is needed, the path forward remains murky. Should Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act be discarded or strengthened? Should companies be broken up using antitrust laws? Should government set speech rules for the web? Should users decide them? Or should there be no rules at all?
There is no shortage of solutions being put forth to solve the challenge of social media censorship. The problem is that without a better understanding of how social platforms invisibly shape the public square of democracy today, we don’t know which of these possible solutions might have the greatest impact. In short, to fix social media, we first need a better understanding of its ills: Section 230 must be amended to legislate social platform transparency.
A new RealClearFoundation report, “Transparency Is the First Step Toward Addressing Social Media Censorship,” outlines the public data sets we need to usher in transparency and better understand the challenges we face.
A retired FBI counterintelligence agent with longtime expertise in signature analysis tells Just the News that Hunter Biden signed an April 2019 Delaware computer repair shop receipt, adding fresh evidence that a controversial laptop turned over to the bureau with eye-popping emails about Ukrainian and Chinese business deals belonged to the president’s son.
Retired Special Agent Wayne A. Barnes, a 29-year FBI veteran who mastered signature analysis while unmasking Soviet spies during the Cold War, says the “R.H. Biden” signature — short for Robert Hunter Biden — on the receipt issued in spring 2019 from John Paul Mac Issac’s repair shop in Delaware matches those on documents known to have been signed by the president’s son, such as Social Security cards, driver’s licenses and other public documents.
“The signature on the computer repair store from April 2019 was signed by RHB,” Barnes wrote in a 24-page report commissioned by Just the News.
In interviews this week, Hunter Biden referred to a scandal about his purported laptop as a “red herring,” while falsely suggesting that the U.S. intelligence community has said the computer is part of a Russian disinformation campaign.
Biden commented most recently on the laptop in an interview Thursday on ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live.”
“I really don’t know, and the fact of the matter is it’s a red herring. It’s absolutely a red herring,” he told Kimmel when asked whether the mystery laptop is his.