Shielding the FBI? Twitter restricted the link to a PJ Media article questioning the FBI’s motives for raiding former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.
Bestselling author and PJ Media columnist Matt Margolis wrote an article for PJ Media titled, “Is This Proof the Mar-a-Lago Raid Was a Fishing Expedition?” In the article, Margolis pointed to comments from Trump’s lawyers and a Fox News report suggesting that the “revelations that the FBI took boxes of privileged documents supports the theory that the raid was a pretext” to search for other information to undermine Trump’s defense about the events of Jan. 6, rather than truly to seize “classified” documents.
The FBI raided Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home on August 8, sparking concerns from conservatives across the country.
Twitter apparently objected to Margolis’s speculative critique of the FBI, however, because the platform restricted the tweeted article link. “Warning: this link may be unsafe” or “potentially spammy,” read the Twitter warning that came up after clicking the link.
Twitter apparently objects to speculation that President Joe Biden’s FBI acted in bad faith, but it hasn’t acted against a violence-promoting tweet posted by former CIA Director and NewsGuard advisor Michael Hayden seemingly promoting the execution of Trump.
Hayden’s tweet potentially violates Twitter’s Violent threats policy, which states, “You may not threaten violence against an individual or a group of people. We also prohibit the glorification of violence.”
In the article Twitter restricted, Margolis quoted Trump’s comment about the documentation the FBI claimed were pretext for the raid: “They could have had it anytime they wanted—and that includes LONG ago. ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS ASK.”
“I don’t think they’re that interested in classified information or the Presidential Records Act,” PJ Media quoted Andrew C. McCarthy, a former assistant attorney for the Southern District of New York. “They’re looking for evidence to try to make a case on Trump for Jan. 6.”
Margolis concluded, “It looks like he was right.”
Some of the documents seized by the FBI were covered by “attorney-client privilege,” and some potentially by executive privilege, Margolis wrote.
“Why does this matter? Because Trump has repeatedly asserted executive privilege in the Democrats’ January 6th witchhunt investigation,” he wrote. “Now, as a result of the FBI’s raid, the FBI has documents covered by attorney-client privilege and possibly executive privilege in their possession.”
Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency and an equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.