Skip to main content
Politics

‘Twitter Files’ House subcommittee hearing marred by grandstanding

Share

Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger, two of the journalists credited with publishing “The Twitter Files,” testified at a hearing in front of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government Thursday. Taibbi and Shellenberger published Twitter Files threads on the social media app after Elon Musk gave them access to internal communication.

The Twitter Files revealed the FBI paid Twitter for information requests and the government asked the company to penalize accounts spreading so-called “misinformation.” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, expressed concern regarding the federal government’s relationship with Big Tech.

“Now think about that. The federal government is saying ‘we want you to do a background check on members of the press,’” Rep. Jordan said Thursday. “Freedom of the press mentioned in the First Amendment and they want Twitter to do a background check on you before they can talk to you in America?”

Besides its subject matter, the Twitter Files hearing was highlighted by members of the House subcommittee straying from the purpose of a typical hearing. Congress.gov, the official website for federal legislative information, refers to “hearings” as “a method by which committee members gather information to inform committee business.”

Instead of genuinely questioning the journalists and gathering information, some of the elected members used their minutes to grandstand.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The Twitter Files debate hit the Hill this week, as journalists Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger joined a hearing with a house subcommittee.
The two were *asked* a bunch of questions…but weren’t exactly given a chance to respond.
“It’s quite obvious that you profited from the Twitter FIles. You hit the jackpot on that Vegas slot machine to which you referred. That’s true, isn’t it?”
“I’ve also reinvested–”
“No no no no. Is it true that you have profited since you were the recipient of the Twitter FIles? You’ve made money.”
“I think it was a wash, honestly–”
“Nope. You’ve have money that you did not have before, correct?”
At the heart of this controversy are Twitter Files revelations that the FBI paid Twitter for information requests and the government asked the company to penalize accounts spreading so-called “misinformation.”
Both Taibbi and Shellenberger have published Twitter Files threads after Elon Musk gave them access to internal communication.
Republicans brought them in as witnesses before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
Republican Representative Jim Jordan expressed concern regarding the government relationship with big tech.
“Now think about that. The federal government is saying ‘we want you to do a background check on members of the press.’ Freedom of the press mentioned in the first amendment and they want twitter to do a background check on you before they can talk to you in America?”
Democrats questioned Taibbi and Shellenberger’s qualifications and reporting.
“In your discussion–in your answer, you also said that you were invited by a friend, Bari Weiss?”
“My friend Bari Weiss.”
“So this friend works for Twitter?”
“Are you being paid to be here today?”
“Absolutely not”
“Time has expired. The gentlelady’s time has expired.”
Thank you.”
Now matter what you think of the Twitter Files, or how you feel about these journalists…congress members themselves strayed from the purpose of a meeting like this.
Congress.gov, the official website for federal legislative information, refers to “hearings” as “a method by which committee members gather information to inform committee business.”
Instead of genuinely questioning the journalists and gathering information, some of the elected members used their minutes to grandstand.