(LifeSiteNews) — In a recent monologue, conservative television host Tucker Carlson challenged the reason behind former government intelligence officials being employed by Twitter.
Carlson began his discussion by rhetorically asking his audience, “How many spies would you hire” to work at a tech company, referring to employees with experience in high-level government positions.
“Spies have nothing to do with the mission of a social media company. They would not be needed,” he said. “Yet for some reason, Twitter seems to need an awful lot of spies.”
What are Spies doing working for Social Media companies?@ElonMusk should take a look at anyone in the FBI, Intel community or any foreign operatives currently working for Twitter and make sure there are no more Jim Bakers working against him from the inside.. pic.twitter.com/ZW7hLuXhIr
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) December 14, 2022
As recent developments have shown, “the upper ranks of Twitter … were absolutely loaded with people who once did intel work for government agencies.” Carlson noted that “at least 15 of these people” were hired and most began working for the organization “in the wake of Donald Trump’s election.”
Carlson highlighted the case of James Baker, a former FBI employee who served as general counsel for the agency. Baker was fired from his position as deputy general counsel by Musk last week over concerns that he may have contributed to the “suppression of information important to the public dialogue,” as previously reported by LifeSiteNews.
Several other employees at the social media company also worked for the FBI at some point. Other Twitter employees were formerly employed by the U.S. cyber command, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA), and a former director of naval counterintelligence.
“And it wasn’t just American intel officers who found a home at Twitter,” Carlson continued. “The company hired foreign spies, too. In January, Peter Zatko was fired from his position as Twitter’s head of security. Reportedly, Zatko lost his job because he complained about the level of control that foreign intelligence agencies had over virtually all of Twitter’s operations. According to Zatko, there were operatives on Twitter’s payroll from other governments, including China and India, and they had access to private user data.”
Carlson then posed the question, “Could it be that while the rest of us imagined that Twitter was a social media site … that Twitter was actually, maybe primarily, a propaganda tool, an intelligence-gathering apparatus for a variety of intel agencies?”
“Keep in mind that Twitter’s Direct Message (DM) feature functioned for many years as a kind of private text app for some of the world’s most prominent people. So, if you wanted to know what high government officials really thought, or if you wanted to know what well-informed sources were telling reporters off the record, you would want to see those messages. Did Twitter executives ever share those DMs, those private messages, with anyone outside the company without a warrant? We strongly suspect that they did.”
Carlson concluded his monologue by stating that Elon Musk now owns and controls “the most significant trove of secret information ever to reside in private hands,” which he hopes is revealed to the public.
Although Carlson expressed uncertainty that key information would be opened to the public, many conservatives have celebrated the company’s actions to remove and expose censorship on the platform. In recent weeks, information has been revealed that proves the company specifically censored content and individuals who were speaking in contradiction to the organization’s preferred political agenda.
On December 2, LifeSiteNews reported that Musk released the “Twitter files,” or internal records that showed the platform’s acts of censorship and the story behind the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 presidential election. Among these files is proof that conservatives, some of whom were political candidates, were officially “shadow banned” by the organization.
More recently, evidence revealed that Twitter went against its “public interest policy” when permanently banning Donald Trump from the platform. This censorship took place despite the internal decision that his January 6 posts did not incite violence.