TRUST ME YOU NEED TO READ THIS

(Photo by Mariia Demchenko/via Getty Images)

Apologies for the cryptic title, but the following will discuss information that got my account locked on Twitter, and I want to make sure that this does not happen again when I put this across social media. Yesterday, I posted an off site link to the Thread Reader App, which “unrolls” lengthy Twitter threads in a layout format on their site so that the content is easier to read.

I made my post as a “quote tweet” which sits above an original post that you are talking about or talking to, kind of like a more prominent, reverse comment. I did this so that my followers could see that the content they had put up had also been removed. I was making the point that Elon Musk seemed more concerned about protecting the public actions of Conservative politicians than he was about people calling me the “C-word” because none of my reports of gender-based abuse on Twitter ever result in a locked account or the removal of the offending tweet.

The original, apparently offending tweet (see below), was made by Pablo Manríquez, who describes himself as a “hill reporter.” It appears as though Manriquez got his hands on some papers saying, “someone, presumably a staffer, left a folder full of briefing documents on TED CRUZ donors in the Senate Refectory.” The papers included a series of dossier-like instructions for Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) about a series of fundraising meetings he would be taking with high end donors.

Although the content from the Manriquez tweet had already been removed by Twitter, I posted a link to the thread unroll app page which showed all of the documents and the series of tweets that had since been removed. When I went to check back into my Twitter account a few hours later, I was directed to a Lock Screen that explained my infraction.

In order to proceed, I had to click a button that instantly deleted the tweet with the link to the offending information, that was supposedly too personal. I did that and had instant access to my account again, so the entire thing was done by an automated process that was set up by an algorithm to detect the new link that people were sending out. Here is a screen grab:

The first thing I want to say is that I am an attorney who is well versed on the legal issues that should constitute any violation regarding Freedom of Speech. I am incredibly careful about the information I post, and I would never engage in the doxxing behavior that Twitter claimed this constituted. Although I believe I have a legal right to post a link to that thread through my newsletter here, I will be posting this article across social media and I do not want to risk any further infractions with Mr. Musk right now. For this reason, I will be describing the content to you, as it is not really all that interesting once you know the kinds of details contained within it.

The next thing you should know is that Twitter is not a traditional, legal, public forum where people are allowed to make statements that would normally be considered free speech under the laws derived from the US Constitution. Twitter is a privately owned company, and as such, has complete discretion about the rules and procedures it imposes amongst its users. Bottom line: Elon Musk is completely able to determine and modify what is said on the Twitter platform, and he is able to post whatever he likes without repercussion, because most of his advertisers have already fled the site.

The real story here is not the documents that were released or what was contained within those documents. While the composite of each dossier had detailed information about each person, what they owned, how much they had donated, and their personal and professional investments, none of this information was something that was not publicly available.

Clearly, Ted Cruz was somehow able to get someone from Twitter on the phone to complain to and a Twitter employee with the power to remove content was persuaded that Cruz had a doxxing claim that was legitimate. Whatever threats or pleas were made, Elon Musk was amenable to making an executive decision that greatly favored another Conservative politician at the expense of several liberal activists and reporters.

By law, political donors have to disclose their donations, which are all available on a website where you can sort through each one. So while the information provided on the pages that were allegedly posted in violation of Twitter’s “doxxing” policy, there was nothing there that has not already been made public. Considering these papers involve the actions of an elected official, there is also nothing there that, if published, would be done with “malicious intent.”

Nothing in the documents proved or reflected that Ted Cruz or any of his rich donors were doing anything illegal. The information was not salacious, as many business people and corporate entities make donations to both political parties to secure favor in the event that one side wins. The information contained in the dossiers described what interests each person had, where they were from, and basically anything that Senator Cruz might be able to use during a quick meeting to impress them and get a big chunk of cash.

Again, there is no description here of anything illegal and everything that is being done is fairly common for most politicians. Nothing in these papers was so sensitive that it could not be found on Wikipedia, and FEC database, or with a basic google search. These documents were put together by staffers, who were likely using the internet for most of the detailed research. While I could go through each name in detail and review their entire political donation history, I believe that would be a waste of time.

The tweet was made scandalous and only went viral because Twitter (X) banned it. Cruz really had nothing to worry about with the practice of his staff making him dossiers for his fundraising meetings going public, because though it might look cheesy and inauthentic, many politicians likely do the same thing.

It seems the only logical conclusion for the uproar over the “sensitive nature” of these documents would be that a handful of rich people could get embarrassed and worried about the effect this might have on their company’s reputation. What concerns me most is that Cruz apparently has the power to make one phone call to get a lot of important reporting accounts banned, and that Elon Musk will seemingly entertain doing it.

Musk has made no secret of his right wing-populist affiliation with certain fascist political tendencies, all while annoyingly presenting himself as a trendy, irreverent, anti-establishment man of the people. He has made anti-semetic posts from his personal account that he has since deleted, but for which he has never really apologized.

Hate speech has gone up exponentially on Twitter, now X, since Musk took over. The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) released research that X fails to remove posts that contain hate speech despite being notified that the content violates the company’s current hateful conduct guidelines. The response: Musk has sued the CCDH for “tortious interference.”

It would be naive to think that liberal accounts on Twitter will get any kind of pass in the information they attempt to disseminate leading up to the 2024 election, which could easily shape the future of Twitter. At this point, I think anyone who remains on Twitter and who posts information that conservatives find offensive should consider two things — how to post safely and stay out of the political fray while attempting to post on politics; and how to create a back-up plan when the conservative hammer does inevitably come down on your liberal account.

For the next few months I would caution everyone to start smart posting — meaning, really think about the content you are tweeting and retweeting, and then err on the side of caution. I am going to do this as well, taking into account my need to report on politics and thinking a little more about how to do that. I will now focus on getting the information out in a way that bypasses all of the Musk-inflicted hypocritical rules, that adhere to no real logic or discernibility.

I also have a back-up plan that I concocted after my account was unjustly suspended a few years ago, before Musk took over and before Twitter had really figured out how they would proceed with copyright laws. This sounds all very dramatic, but in the event that my treasured girlsreallyrule account gets targeted and pulled for whatever reason leading up to the election, I will immediately commandeer my mother’s Twitter account mamasreallyrule, that she rarely uses and just basically maintains for me in an emergency.

You should follow that account just to be prepared, and consider creating your own back-up account that you start developing now, if you haven’t already. I will always continue to keep speaking truth to power through this SHERO newsletter, so subscribing now means that every article comes right to your inbox. This is a good idea in case things get worse on Twitter (X). Until then, chin up and don’t be deterred — we still have months to go until this next election.

---

Amee Vanderpool writes the SHERO Newsletter, is an attorney, published author, contributor to newspapers and magazines, and an analyst for BBC radio. She can be reached at avanderpool@gmail.com or follow her on Twitter @girlsreallyrule.

Paid subscriptions and one-time tributes embedded in each article allow me to keep publishing critical and informative work that is sometimes made available to the public — thank you. If you like this piece and want to support independent journalism further, you can forward this article to others, get a paid subscription or gift subscription, or donate as much as you like today.