Judd Legum

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

17. 1:30PM UPDATE: This article and three other related NY Post pieces have now been shared 75K times on Facebook (via @crowdtangle) https://t.co/ea4kjvbjci — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

16. CODA: The Biden campaign responds. "[W]e have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place" — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

17. This article and three other related NY Post pieces have been shares 75K times on Facebook in a few hours https://t.co/Yqj4OboibB — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

16. CODA: The Biden campaign responds. "[W]e have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place" — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

Interesting that Facebook is throttling distribution of the article prior to third-party fact checking. That's not normally how it works. I've asked Facebook for an explanation and will let you know if I hear back. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

https://t.co/xaWiSH4cA1 — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

@nycsouthpaw NY Post actually doxed the owner in one of the documents — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

15. If you liked this thread, you'll really like my newsletter https://t.co/TfpCItdVSo — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

14. As of 9:50AM, the New York Post piece has been shared more than 26,000 times on Facebook https://t.co/RfTQLvE6ts — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

13. I should clarify that, assuming the email is legit, it doesn't establish that a meeting took place. Just that Hunter offered an "opportunity" to meet his father. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

12. Nevertheless, this incredibly sketchy, totally unverified, and ultimately irrelevant story is being promoted by mainstream journalists who don't work for the New York Post. Don't be fooled by that. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

11. Allegedly, the laptop Hunter "forgot" to pick up also contains a 12 minute video of him smoking crack and having sex with an unidentified woman. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

10. The prosecutor was corrupt, which is why the entire international community was calling for his ouster. Replacing the corrupt prosecutor brought more scrutiny on Bursima, not less — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

9. This is a scandal? There is no word on the length of the meeting or what was discussed. The New York Post says its significant because Biden then called for the ouster of the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Bursima. FALSE The prosecutor was not investigating Bursima — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

8. But this is the important point. Pretending, for a moment, that everything in the story is true (very doubtful) it is totally inconsequential. Supposedly one "email" recovered on the laptop "proves" that Hunter once introduced a Bursima exec to his father. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

7. The New York Post allegedly learned about this copy of the laptop through Steven Bannon. Both Giuliani and Bannon are regular sources of disinformation — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

6. Then things get very weird. The shop owner says, before turning over the computer to the feds, they made a copy of the contents of the computer and gave them to Rudy Giuliani's lawyer Mmmmhmmmm — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

5. The piece claims the shop owner then alerted the FBI to the existence of the laptop and it was later subpoenaed by a grand jury. But the grand jury subpoena shown does not connect the laptop to Hunter Biden. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

4. But then, after claiming the shop owner couldn't identify the customer, the piece includes a receipt that was issued to "Hunter Biden" and includes an email and phone # So why would the shop owner produce a receipt for Hunter Biden if he didn't know the ID of the customer? — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

3. The "shop owner" thinks it was Hunter Biden because of a Beau Biden sticker on the laptop. This makes no sense. You drop off an expensive Mac laptop at a repair shop and don't leave your name or contact information? — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

2. First the information comes from a laptop that was allegedly "dropped off at a repair shop in Biden’s home state of Delaware" and never picked up. The "shop owner," who is not identified, "couldn’t positively identify the customer as Hunter Biden" — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

1. I'm going to go through a few issues with the NY Post article on Biden, which I won't link to, but you will probably see on Twitter today. Follow along if interested. — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

@BicknellAlf He's saying in the future the Supreme Court should grant cert on a case to consider how the lower courts have interpreted the statute — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

6. Is Thomas exactly right about Section 230? I'm not sure. But it is clear that the current system is badly broken. Tech companies claim to be addressing problems voluntarily, but things keep getting worse More stuff worth your time in my newsletter --> https://t.co/TfpCItdVSo — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

5. Thomas argues this goes too far. It's created a strange agreement between Thomas, who is accused of sexual harassment, and lawyers like @cagoldberglaw, who sues harassers Goldberg told me Thomas' opinion was "excellent and clear-eyed" https://t.co/wMnvWidiaN — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

4. Thomas also notes courts have protected platforms against cases that are based on the theory they have created a defective product. He pointed to a case against Grindr where the company said it was unable to stop someone from impersonating the plaintiff https://t.co/wMnvWidiaN — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

3. Thomas also says section 230 protects platforms that decide to remove content, but only when it's done in good faith. Now tech companies are protected whenever they remove content, even if the plaintiff alleges the purpose is racially discriminatory https://t.co/wMnvWidiaN — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

2. Thomas says Section 230 protects platforms from liability from unknowingly failing to remove illegal content, once the platform becomes aware of the content, it can be held liable This change could make platforms more responsive to user reports https://t.co/wMnvWidiaN — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

1. Clarence Thomas wrote an unusual opinion released Tuesday that's worth your attention Thomas argues that courts are giving tech platforms like Facebook overly broad legal immunity He says the Supreme Court should take a case to rein it in https://t.co/wMnvWidiaN — PolitiTweet.org

Judd Legum @JuddLegum

This kind of behavior would end any other presidential campaign. For Trump, it’s a Tuesday. — PolitiTweet.org