1) Whistleblower says "New Knowledge" cybersecurity firm run by Jonathan Morgan & Renee DiResta trafficked in election disinformation.
Documents show Center for American Progress paid to for Hamilton 68 dashboard caught spreading Russian disinformation. pauldthacker.com/blog/#/
2) New Knowledge filled w/ former NSA agents who explained the game to Betsy Depuis while out for drinks:
NSA cannot violate the Constitution, so they hire contractors to do their dirty work of spying on Americans and censoring them.
3) Betsy Depuis was tasked w/ improving the Hamilton 68 dashboard, a job paid for by the Center for American Progress. @mtaibbi later exposed the dashboard spread disinformation, and the Washington Post ran multiple corrections.
4) The Hamilton 68 upgrade involved the German Marshall Fund, Center for American Progress's Think Progress, and "disinformation journalist" Andrew Weisburd.
Basically, a coalition of left of centre groups.
5) While updating the Hamilton 68 dashboard, Depuis began tracking Russian disinformation in an Alabama Senate race, not realising New Knowledge was creating the disinformation bots.
In the office, people called this the "Alabama Project."
6) DEPUIS: "The dashboard I was building that the Center for American Progress funded was, in effect, measuring the outcome of New Knowledge’s disinformation campaign against Roy Moore, who is a reprehensible person."
7) Depuis says that Stanford's Renee DiResta worked on the Alabama Project, but DiResta says she joined New Knowledge after the project ended.
7) Depuis eventually reached the end of her rope.
"We had this all-hands meeting where they discussed that they had successfully run a disinformation campaign, and announced that DoD was funding us to build a disinformation propagation platform."
8) After she complained that she did not want to be involved in creating disinformation, New Knowledge shoved Depuis out the door, forcing her to sign an NDA.
9) DEPUIS: I think they fired me because I was being insubordinate. And that I voiced disagreement about what they were doing.
10) DEPUIS: "I just kept quiet, until now, because I didn’t want to be accused of spreading a conspiracy theory."
1) EXCLUSIVE DOCUMENTS: Working w/ @mtaibbi we report on @CCDHate documents showing the Labour Party's political front's objective is "Kill Musk's Twitter" thru "Advertising focus" meaning harass his advertisers.
See internal documents provided by a whistleblower.
2) Internal Center for Countering Digital Hate document shows their annual objective is "Kill Musk's Twitter"
This is their internal monthly planner. Their goal is to also trigger regulatory action, although they are a tax-exempt nonprofit.
3) CCDH held a private conference w/ a slew of liberal groups organizing against Musk including Biden White House, Congressman Adam Schiff's office, Biden/Harris State Department officials, Canadian MP Peter Julian & Media Matters for America
1) Twitter Files: Democrats & media claimed Twitter 1.0 was a “private company” that made its own decisions, despite Biden Administration pressure to censor.
But new emails show Twitter hired a lobby shop staffed w/ Biden loyalists & then coordinated w/ Biden State Dept.
2) “This is John Hughes from Albright Stonebridge Group, the commercial diplomacy firm founded by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright,” wrote Twitter’s lobbyist to a senior official at State.
Twitter was seeking “advice” and help.
3) Politico reported around this same time that 10 of Biden’s top foreign policy crowd came from Albright Stonebridge.
2) Cochrane's Karla Soares-Weiser put out a statement attacking Cochrane's own mask review due to pressure from Zeynep Tufekci:
“Lisa, I have been back and forth with NYT about the mask review. CAN I GET YOUR VIEWS ON THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS?”
3) Several days later, Tufekci published a "masks work" essay in the NY Times and Karla Soares-Weiser rushed out a statement claiming problems with the mask review.
Soares-Weiser did this w/o consulting the scientists who wrote the mask review.
1) Going through hundreds of emails, it's clear @zeynep bullied Cochrane into publishing a statement against their own review and twisted the words of Cochrane editor Michael Brown.
2) After Cochrane published their 2023 mask review update, Bret Stephens wrote a NYT column ridiculing mask mandate activists--people like Zeynep Tufekci.
3 days later on Feb 24, Zeynep contacted Cochrane, but not the scientists. She went around them to the editors.
3) Zeynep introdued herself to Cochrane editor Michael Brown as an "academic" working on a review "in my own field."
Zeynep has published 0 in the academic literature this year, and one article in 2023--an opinion piece. As for that review, it has never appeared.