October 12th, 2024

Trump campaign worked with Musk's X to keep leaked JD Vance file off platform

Donald Trump's campaign collaborated with X to suppress a leaked document about JD Vance, leading to journalist Ken Klippenstein's ban. Concerns about Musk's influence on free speech have emerged.

Read original articleLink Icon
Trump campaign worked with Musk's X to keep leaked JD Vance file off platform

Donald Trump's campaign collaborated with X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk, to suppress a leaked vetting document concerning Trump's running mate, JD Vance. The document, which was shared by journalist Ken Klippenstein, contained sensitive personal information and was linked to a hack of the Trump campaign attributed to Iranian actors. In response to the leak, X blocked access to the document and banned Klippenstein from the platform. This incident has raised concerns about the influence of Musk, a prominent Trump supporter, on the dissemination of information, particularly in the context of the upcoming presidential election. Musk, who has previously positioned himself as a proponent of free speech, has been criticized for using his platform to control the narrative surrounding political candidates. Following the New York Times report, Klippenstein's account was reinstated, and he expressed concerns about the implications of corporate power on free speech rights. Musk has also been actively involved in Trump's campaign, including attending rallies and funding political action efforts aimed at supporting Trump in key swing states.

- Trump's campaign worked with X to block a leaked document about JD Vance.

- Journalist Ken Klippenstein was banned from X after sharing the document.

- The document leak is linked to a hack attributed to Iranian actors.

- Musk's influence on political discourse raises concerns about free speech.

- Musk is actively supporting Trump's campaign through rallies and funding.

Link Icon 2 comments
By @h2odragon - 6 months
Have other platforms similarly suppressed discussion of this document?

We've got the national security assurances that it's "hacked" and several platforms had spoken righteously about their refusal to further such crimes in the past...

Is there any actual Federal pressure to keep these documents unpublished? We've seen evidence that there has been such on other subjects; how would we know if this is similarly being de-emphasized by order?