Twitter Tactics: How Twitter Employees Use a Little-Known Censorship Tactic To Minimize Engagement and Readership

Today, independent media, journalists and bloggers face increasing levels of harassment and censorship such as threats and doxing; shadowbans; censorship of material that threatens capitalism and government narratives; social engineering, defamation, and disinformation propaganda operations; and even murder.

Thankfully, my website is still up (for now) but I can’t say the same thing about my experience on Twitter. My account has repeatedly been targeted and mass reported by a group of disinformation operatives that I’ve exposed over the past few years.

Additionally, after running a series of tests on Twitter last night, it is now beyond question that someone working at the social media platform has blacklisted ANY AND ALL links to my articles from being retweeted (by me).


In fact, for over a year now, Twitter has targeted both my website and Twitter account with ongoing censorship using a subtle tactic that doesn’t draw much attention. In my opinion, that indicates a Twitter employee who doesn’t want to get caught doing it and is probably working on behalf of an individual or private contractor.

Second, everyone knows that algorithms play a key role on Twitter and the more “likes” a tweet gets, the more exposure it gets. And vice versa.

This is what someone at Twitter is using to censor me and here’s how they’re doing it: If I want to promote an article from my website, I can post a tweet with a link to that article but I am never able to retweet that tweet.

For example, if I tweet out a story in the morning, I am unable to retweet it later that day for those who missed it earlier. If I want to continue promoting the article I am forced to create new tweets.

Twitter literally forces me to create new tweets each and every time I want to promote the same article from my website and this started directly after I started publishing The Rabbit Files, a series that exposed numerous online actors who ran multiple pro-Trump disinformation campaigns on the American public and infiltrated activist groups.

This means that “likes” and “shares” are spread out over multiple tweets and Twitter knows that this affects their algorithms and decreases both engagement and readership.

To be clear, I’m not personally being targeted by Twitter. Any and all links from my website are being targeted. What this also means is that my recent articles, which, again, have exposed an insidious spider web of online disinformation agents (and is the likely reason behind someone at Twitter targeting me), are not the only posts being censored by Twitter.

For example, Twitter’s blacklisting of links that originate from this website is also censoring this ground breaking true story I wrote about a scientist who defected from Russia, helped the U.S. government promote the Iraq war, and then was rewarded with his own bio lab in the Ukraine. The lab was then used by Mukhtar Ablyazov to launder billions of dollars that he stole from Kazakhstan’s BTA bank.

Twitter has also censored “The Gatekeeper Files,” a series I wrote about the rise of the alt-right in American politics and fascism within the WikiLeaks support community. Disinformation agents that I exposed have relentlessly tried to discredit me while blatantly co-opting my work from this series as their own to hide the fact they’re censorship nazis and fascists in sheep’s clothing.

The entire series I wrote about the history of WikiLeaks is also being censored, Again, Twitter forces me to publish a new tweet every single time I want to promote it. No retweets allowed!

My article, “The Syrian Files,” and every other article in the above series has been caught up in this type of censorship, as well.

So has everything I published about political scam artist, Bill Browder, and Russiagate.

And the articles I wrote for MintPress News.

My “The Boston Files” series that I never finished (due to threats, doxing attempts, and concern for my safety) about U.S. government involvement with the Mujahideen, the rise of Islamic extremism on their dime, drug trafficking and how it ties in with the Boston bombing, is also on Twitter’s censorship chopping block.

Again, I can post a tweet with a link to my articles but someone at Twitter has prevented me from retweeting that same tweet in order to minimize readership, censor material in the public’s interest, and protect online disinformation/defamation campaigns.

After using jacked-up links to one of my articles in a number of tweets last night, I was finally able to retweet an original tweet. Incredulously, Twitter deleted it shortly thereafter. Again to minimize engagement. This was the article I tried to retweet last night:

The people censoring me are also censoring this story about Hillary Clinton and her emails:

And this story about the Clintons’ ties to Russia and the Russian mafia because I ain’t partisan when it comes to calling out rotten politicians:

Lastly, they’re trying to bury my articles that have exposed online operations and disinformation agents who ran pro-Trump disinfo ops on the American public and spent the last five years INFILTRATING and DESTROYING activists groups and the WikiLeaks support community.

This insidious and lesser known censorship tactic that someone at Twitter is using to silence my work, which covers a wide range of topics, all of which are in the public’s interest, has been going on for well over a year.

Since the beginning of this year, I’ve had my Twitter account locked down due to threats, harassment, blackmail, targeted abuse, defamation campaigns, trolling, and mass reporting by these same online agents. For instance, after unlocking my account to cover one of Assange’s extradition hearings, this happened within hours:

Today, I decided to unlock my Twitter account again and we’ll see how long it takes these fascist pigs who claim to support WikiLeaks, free speech, free press, truth and transparency, to show their true colors yet again.

Post Disclaimer

Disclaimer: Ten thousand more pages of disclaimers to follow.

If you were mentioned in this article because your associate(s) did or said something stupid/dishonest, that’s not a suggestion that you did or said something stupid/dishonest or that you took part in it. Of course, some may conclude on their own that you associate with stupid/dishonest individuals but that’s called having the right to an opinion. If I’ve questioned something that doesn’t make sense to me, that’s not me spinning the confusing material you’ve put out. That’s me trying to make sense out of something that doesn’t make sense. And if I’ve noted that you failed to back up your allegations that means I either missed where you posted it or you failed to back your shiz up.

If I haven’t specifically stated that I believe (my opinion) someone is associated with someone else or an event, then it means just that. I haven’t reported an association nor is there any inference of association on my part. For example, just because someone is mentioned in this article, it doesn’t mean that they’re involved or associated with everyone and everything else mentioned. If I believe that there’s an association between people and/or events, I’ll specifically report it.

If anyone mentioned in this article wants to claim that I have associated them with someone else or an event because I didn’t disclose every single person and event in the world that they are NOT associated with, that’s called gaslighting an audience and it’s absurd hogwash i.e. “They mentioned that I liked bananas but they didn’t disclose that I don’t like apples. Why are they trying to associate me with apples???” Or something similar to this lovely gem, “I did NOT give Trish the thumb drive!” in order to make their lazy audience believe that it was reported they gave Trish the thumb drive when, in fact, that was never reported, let alone inferred.

That’s some of the BS I’m talking about so try not to act like a psychiatric patient, intelligence agent, or paid cyber mercenary by doing these things. If you would like to share your story, viewpoint, or any evidence that pertains to this article, or feel strongly that something needs to be clarified or corrected (again, that actually pertains to the article), you can reach me at with any questions or concerns.

I cannot confirm and am not confirming the legitimacy of any messages or emails in this article. Please see a doctor if sensitivity continues. If anyone asks, feel free to tell them that I work for Schoenberger, Fitzgibbon, Steven Biss, the CIA, or really just about any intelligence agency because your idiocy, ongoing defamation, and failure as a human is truly a sight to behold for the rest of us.

If I described you as a fruit basket or even a mental patient it's because that is my opinion of you, it's not a diagnosis. I'm not a psychiatrist nor should anyone take my personal opinions as some sort of clinical assessment. Contact @BellaMagnani if you want a rundown on the psych profile she ran on you.

This is an Op-ed article. The information contained in this post is for general information purposes only. While we endeavor to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information contained on the post for any purpose. The owner of this blog makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by following any link on this site.

The views or opinions represented in this blog do not represent those of people, institutions or organizations that the owner may or may not be associated with in professional or personal capacity, unless explicitly stated. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual.

The owner will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information.  The owner will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or use of this information.

Leave a Reply