FEC Says Twitter Blocking Anti-Biden Story During Election Not An Issue

(PresidentialInsider.com)- The Federal Election Commission recently voted to dismiss a complaint over Twitter’s decision to block the spread of a New York Post story about Hunter Biden, which alleged that the social media platform had violated federal election laws and influenced the results of the election.

However, one of the judges who voted – for some reason – to dismiss the complaint did admit that the social media platform may well have been biased in favor of Joe Biden, but didn’t technically break election laws.

Sean Cooksey, a Republican member of the commission, published a three-page justification for his vote to reject the complaint made by the Republican National Committee. He claimed that he believed Twitter could have had a political motive to censor the story, which the platform wrongly claimed was a violation of their “hacked content” policy. Cooksey said that the action did not, however, constitute an in-kind contribution to the Biden campaign.

Let’s be honest – purposely censoring a story that was not the result of a hacking, as the Hunter Biden laptop was obtained legally after the son of the former vice president abandoned it at a Delaware computer repair store, is definitely a contribution to the Biden campaign. It effectively allowed him to win.

A poll showed following the 2020 presidential election that had voters known about the Hunter Biden story, a sufficient number of them would not have voted for the Democrat candidate and President Donald Trump would have won.

The McLaughlin & Associates poll showed how 4.6% of Biden voters wouldn’t have voted for him if they’d have known about it. How is Twitter’s actions not a campaign contribution, then?

Cooksey said in his judgment that the Commission’s factual and legal analysis was “neutral” and that it found that Twitter was “enforcing preexisting, commercially reasonable policies” to protect its business interests.

The only question is…how can Twitter legitimately censor a story based on “hacking” claims when the story was not the result of any hacking?

And provably so?