NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT.
Especially not @jordanschachtel or any of the other bluechecks on both left and right who have been sucking my exhaust for two years and are just desperate to call me a grifter. I am getting an unbelievable view from the inside of how journalism works - or more accurately does not work - in the age of Twitter.
I’ve said it before and I suppose I’ll say it again: I have always, always been lucky in my enemies.
As long as it is allowing you to publicize what the relationship between Twitter and the Feds was, lots of people will be happy. Otherwise, less so. We can wait to find out.
Let's hope it shines a light on the incestuous relationship between the authoritarians of all stripes, whether at Twitter or in DC.
Not a big fan of the blue checks in general, but he does raise an important question about donations. People donated money meant to fund a prolonged battle not to reach a quick settlement.
It's a legitimate concern. Typically, settlements like this mean that little or no information will be released to the public. We'll see what happens, but it seems unlikely that we're going to learn a lot about Twitter's relationship with the Biden administration, for example...I hope I'm wrong about that.
"NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT."
Notice all Alex says is "None of you know"....nothing about what he is going to tell or IF he is going to reveal anything *substantial*. He’s doing what Alex does best when he’s got nothing to back himself up — he gets pissy and derogatory. Just like with his stance against ivermectin. He couldn’t stay neutral — he had to actually lash out at and insult his subscribers who have reviewed the data on the effectiveness of ivermectin as part of a multi pronged treatment approach. Hundreds of studies showing efficacy. What does Alex do? Picks ONE study with unfavorable findings and shouts from the rooftops that he’s been right all along and his troglodyte subscribers can suck eggs. No careful walk thru of the findings like in his other fine journalism. Only vindictive. (BTW, other more serious writers did do a point by point walk thru of that trial and found it to be severely flawed)
Same here. Not even a promise of a serious and thoughtful follow up. Just a child lashing out at justified criticism. Jordan wouldn’t have room to criticize if Berenson had spoken out first with meaningful information—and let’s admit, Berenson has known for some time what this deal would consist of and had plenty of time to write about it in preparation of release.
My money is on he will hide behind some confidentiality cloak and hope all his subscribers and contributors will forget if he.strings it out long enough.
Beware the man who lashes out with nothing but anger when confronted with serious allegations. Alex provided nothing meaningful by way of explanation to Jordan's criticisms. Let that be the first warning light.
I was an eager subscriber when he proclaimed his intention to follow Big Pharma to the ends of the earth to reveal their crimes against humanity (or some such proclamation). I subsequently unsubscribed when I realized his "reporting" consisted of too many hot takes and caustic remarks, and not enough serious dissection of the facts. He runs hot and cold as evidenced by this little missive.
Good luck to those who trusted and contributed to his cause. I truly hope something substantial comes from it. I’m not holding my breath.
while it's true we don't know what's in the settlement, we do know what you've posted, and experienced the garden path you clearly led us down. discovery will basically not happen at this stage, or rather, if it does, it will be a severely neutered form. there is no way they would allow this to happen, while settling.
Alex, you set up a GoFundMe account to raise money for your legal battle, yes?
You settled said legal battle.
Unless your settlement includes a HUGE admission of wrongdoing by Twitter for censoring dissident voices (unlikely, since the general idea of settling is companies avoid such damning admissions), you settled for something less than the principle at stake.
And Jordan called you out on it.
You put this out there. You made the story. You made yourself the story.
As long as the settlement doesn't cross this "red line" we're good:
Update on Berenson v Twitter
This would be a very good time to donate to the legal fund
Alex Berenson
Jun 6
"Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
To be fair — It appeared to me as an ardent follower of your substack that it did appear that you fundraised under the pretense to shine light- so it would be reasonable for those who supported to expect to get some “light” for their donations even that may result in a less beneficial secret NDA settlement for yourself?
I Understand winning a settlement, but it probably is safe to assume it’s quite the payout to include all of your attorney fees that you solicited donations for. I hope you would consider donating those raised funds to other freedom fighting causes or are still on the fight!
In another important legal battle— Feds 4 Medical Freedom just got the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to put the vaccine injunction for federal employees back in place and rehearing the case En Banc. Grassroots efforts with no major donors and there are a lot of other great causes that likely deserve your platform to get the word out!
Why is Jordan your enemy here? If all is fine and good and you will still deliver on your promise, can you not just prove him wrong? Frankly, I really enjoy your snark, but often it comes out in what looks like an uncalled for overreaction and less like intrepid journalism that refuses to compromise.
I don't really care what you think about Jordan. I can form my opinions about him by myself. I DO care about your response to the SUBSTANCE of his criticism. Please set your ego aside for a minute and address these legitimate, adult concerns like a legitimate adult. Saying stuff like “NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT,” just brings up more questions than answers. Not helpful, even with the Caps Lock.
Anyway, I'm here with the popcorn waiting to be convinced things are fine, but I can't say it looks like you're winning here. I really appreciated your Unreported Truths and Pandemia books. I'm not your enemy, but I can't exactly call myself a fan at this point either.
Alex..I have not always agreed with you. ie ivermectin BUT......I hope you take Twitter to the cleaners. I hope you make a shit ton of money. I believe you when you said you would shine the light on them. YOU FOUGHT and didn't quit. Haters are gonna hate. Sorry...but fuck 'em
See my June 3 comment in response to “Update Berenson v. Twitter” dated June 2. Don’t hate on Alex, this is how these matters proceed. He achieved a great deal by bringing the action in the first instance. Remember, it’s a marathon, not a sprint.
"Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
So not all hope is lost but it seems that this settlement was already in the works when the above mentioned post was created.
You have been a voice of truth and enlightenment re: Covid-19 and the vax for many, and for that you are a national treasure. I don't like your views on Trump, or Ivermectin. I think you have seen through the Fog of Propaganda on Covid-19 exceedingly well, but you haven't made your way through the fog yet on those issues.
I have never seen anything that indicates you are dishonest, or anything but genuine in your assertions and convictions. So, I believe your earlier mailing where you indicate that you will not settle if you are gagged (unless and until proven wrong).
You are one of the good ones, and we shouldn't rush to assume (as is the norm in today's world).
The lesson here is that everyone in media these days (and just about everywhere else), including Alex, adopts the primary moral principle to put as much money in their bank account as possible to help fund their early retirement and make them feel higher in the social dominance hierarchy.
But while they engage in that primary pursuit, they adopt certain topical interests and biases that are generally authentic (because faking it would be too difficult to hide) and feed the interests of certain media consumers.
I have said this before but the people of the US lost their moral compass for being principled above what they think they can get away with to improve their wealth and power when Bill Clinton sat there on national TV and told his baldfaced lie that he did not have sex with that woman Ms. Lewinski. In that single act the leader of the free world let it be known that it was okay to lie, cheat and steal as long as you can get away with it.
So today Alex, assuming he took the Twitter cash, can only be criticized as being a normal modern moral person while being lauded as writing good stuff.
Alex, this is not right if you don't at least provide some context. You know exactly what the reason for the donations in this lawsuit was. Like it or not, this will otherwise make you look like a grifter!
Settlements are typically secret are continually negotiated from day one of the filing. Always keep the door open but keep fighting. I believe that Twitter settled because they were going to lose their section 230 if their partnership with the Governments were exposed with docs that Alex subpoenaed eg propaganda machine of totalitarian Government. The dummies don't realize that if Twitter was solely acting alone without Government direction and support, its a slam dunk against Alex. Since Governments are directly working with Twitter to censor, censure, and otherwise curtail content, Twitter is no longer acting independently as a private company, but an arm of the Government propaganda machine. The legal question to be answered would need to be answered is whether Twitter acted in concert with the Government and to what degree. Eg Depositions, discovery for several years. We are all stuck waiting to hear what we can from Alex as he is the aggrieved party. I doubt Alex would settle for less that pious intentions especially after all the money that is needed to litigate. Remember Justice is not free and neither are attorneys. After what they do to all of us? us = people who are banned from Twitter cause the Government doesn't like us. I would totally stick it to Twitter for as much and as far I could get. I would force do quite a few things plus lots of cash = eg litigation is expensive and I would also want a retirement. Its always cheaper for a company to settle than it is to litigate period. You have to determine what your chances of successful litigation are eg business decision (non emotional) Twitter had to decide if the risk of litigating and losing is worth not settling in the short term. My bet is that Twitter recognized that if private company documents were released showing Government collusion would do more damage (not that it isn't severely damaged) to their brand than settling for copious amounts of money and some other piddly stuff and it would push them closer to being liable for the section 230 loss. eg (Alex is blue checked and can never be banned for anything he says; an apology letter or various as sundry of small things).
Alex is blameless in the sense is he is accomplishing what he set out to do. His settlement is not a statement of his desire to not stick it to Twitter. Its a reflection of how desperate Twitter is and probability of a long costly litigation of which Twitter has superior resources and endless cash to throw down. I could be totally wrong. Allow the process to continue and wait.
We don't know what the details are. So there's no value in bashing anyone until we hear.
If this results in a total change in Twitter policies, and numerous people are allowed back on Twitter, then anyone who donated (I didn't) should be very happy.
If it results in only Alex being allowed back on Twitter - especially if any details of the settlement are agreed to be confidential - then anyone who donated should feel like a total sucker.
Complete confidence here that Berenson is an honest broker . He was one of the few who went up against the pharma industrial complex on MRNA jabs and the data proves him right .
The promise by Alex was disclosure and transparency of twitters behavior and the possible collusion with government. If in the end, Alex gets a paycheck and is required under agreement to keep everything he and his attorneys learned under wraps, then we have a ethical/character problem with Alex. However, I cannot discount the positive work he has done. I will give him time for rebuttal. But it certainly does not reflect well on him at this moment. Let's see what hsppens.
Time and again the first reaction to any news is "Ready, Fire, Aim! " Everyone wants to be first with their hot take. Let this play out before you commit to a narrative.
I hate when we fight people on the same team. Jordan is a great reporter but should give Alex the benefit of the doubt. Just like Alex should give Malone the benefit of the doubt. The 3 libs on the SCOTUS always stay united no matter what even when they live in fantasyland. Our side would do much better staying united in this fight.
"NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT" - Exactly. Yet, the stated purpose of your suit was to bring Twitter's censorship apparatus into spotlight and you can't/won't release details of the settlement of a suit you fundraised for.
Mr Bluecheck has a point here. He doesn't have to call you a grifter. Your actions are making you look like one.
Was the settlement such that you can't talk about the settlement? If that's the case, then you are a “GRIFTER EXTRAORDINAIRE” if you got to make the discovery you mentioned which was so crucial to the whole lawsuit in the first place, then the settlement is acceptable to me. Just shed light on everything you found out in discovery.
Shouldn't we all reserve judgement until the terms of the settlement are known. If he chooses or is forced to keep them secret then he has betrayed our trust. We supported exposing Twitter; justice; and freedom of speech via the Alex Berenson lawsuit. If the settlement doesn't include these items then shame on us for trusting him.
Seems a little grift-y. We donated money and what do we get to see at the end of it all...not a damn thing. Nothing. Case settled, can't share any details. What was it all for?
Alex…not sure what these poster are thinking, but forcing Twitter to settle and get compensated for your loss of readership and income seems to be about all an individual can do…hopefully sets up precedents against Twitter…
How else would you punish a company into better behaviors other than money or legislation…
Pretty sure you never said you were taking Legislative action.
Some confused people on this thread about winning a settlement as punishment and therefore a grifter???
"As we debate the power and political influence of social media companies, this discovery offers a unique opportunity to see how Twitter and the federal government and others may have colluded against my voice. No one else has this chance. No one.
And I am not going to give it up.
Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
If you’re hush hushing the settlement, it makes you look like a grifter. Plain and simple. The stated goal wasn’t a settlement.
I don't think you're a grifter. Yes, I am scratching my head over this right now. But I'm willing to wait and see what happens.
I think you're a good guy. You've done great and important work.
I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.
As long as it is allowing you to publicize what the relationship between Twitter and the Feds was, lots of people will be happy. Otherwise, less so. We can wait to find out.
Let's hope it shines a light on the incestuous relationship between the authoritarians of all stripes, whether at Twitter or in DC.
We have got to stop rushing to judgment in our own echo chambers. Alex I'm willing to read your side of all this when you're ready.
Not a big fan of the blue checks in general, but he does raise an important question about donations. People donated money meant to fund a prolonged battle not to reach a quick settlement.
ALEX IGNORE THESE PEOPLE. Just do NOT respond.
Do NOT LET THEM GET UNDER YOUR SKIN.
Ignore.
And you owe NO ONE an apology for anything.
This just in: Berenson is an evil meanie and steals people's money.
Source: Dude, trust me.
What a clown Schachtel is!
It's a legitimate concern. Typically, settlements like this mean that little or no information will be released to the public. We'll see what happens, but it seems unlikely that we're going to learn a lot about Twitter's relationship with the Biden administration, for example...I hope I'm wrong about that.
"NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT."
Notice all Alex says is "None of you know"....nothing about what he is going to tell or IF he is going to reveal anything *substantial*. He’s doing what Alex does best when he’s got nothing to back himself up — he gets pissy and derogatory. Just like with his stance against ivermectin. He couldn’t stay neutral — he had to actually lash out at and insult his subscribers who have reviewed the data on the effectiveness of ivermectin as part of a multi pronged treatment approach. Hundreds of studies showing efficacy. What does Alex do? Picks ONE study with unfavorable findings and shouts from the rooftops that he’s been right all along and his troglodyte subscribers can suck eggs. No careful walk thru of the findings like in his other fine journalism. Only vindictive. (BTW, other more serious writers did do a point by point walk thru of that trial and found it to be severely flawed)
Same here. Not even a promise of a serious and thoughtful follow up. Just a child lashing out at justified criticism. Jordan wouldn’t have room to criticize if Berenson had spoken out first with meaningful information—and let’s admit, Berenson has known for some time what this deal would consist of and had plenty of time to write about it in preparation of release.
My money is on he will hide behind some confidentiality cloak and hope all his subscribers and contributors will forget if he.strings it out long enough.
Beware the man who lashes out with nothing but anger when confronted with serious allegations. Alex provided nothing meaningful by way of explanation to Jordan's criticisms. Let that be the first warning light.
I was an eager subscriber when he proclaimed his intention to follow Big Pharma to the ends of the earth to reveal their crimes against humanity (or some such proclamation). I subsequently unsubscribed when I realized his "reporting" consisted of too many hot takes and caustic remarks, and not enough serious dissection of the facts. He runs hot and cold as evidenced by this little missive.
Good luck to those who trusted and contributed to his cause. I truly hope something substantial comes from it. I’m not holding my breath.
Jordan is right. Glad I don't trust anyone, including Alex, so wasn't gifted to support his legal bills.
while it's true we don't know what's in the settlement, we do know what you've posted, and experienced the garden path you clearly led us down. discovery will basically not happen at this stage, or rather, if it does, it will be a severely neutered form. there is no way they would allow this to happen, while settling.
Jordan has a point though, if you get a settlement in cash will you give back the money to your fundraisers?
Your reporting over the last two years has earned you the benefit of the doubt, at least from me. I won't pass judgement until I hear the whole story.
Let's wait for the data, people! Who do you think you are, Pfizer?
The fact that NONE OF US KNOW WHAT'S IN THE SETTLEMENT is kind of the main sticking point though isn't it?
Alex, you set up a GoFundMe account to raise money for your legal battle, yes?
You settled said legal battle.
Unless your settlement includes a HUGE admission of wrongdoing by Twitter for censoring dissident voices (unlikely, since the general idea of settling is companies avoid such damning admissions), you settled for something less than the principle at stake.
And Jordan called you out on it.
You put this out there. You made the story. You made yourself the story.
Own it.
As long as the settlement doesn't cross this "red line" we're good:
Update on Berenson v Twitter
This would be a very good time to donate to the legal fund
Alex Berenson
Jun 6
"Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
To be fair — It appeared to me as an ardent follower of your substack that it did appear that you fundraised under the pretense to shine light- so it would be reasonable for those who supported to expect to get some “light” for their donations even that may result in a less beneficial secret NDA settlement for yourself?
I Understand winning a settlement, but it probably is safe to assume it’s quite the payout to include all of your attorney fees that you solicited donations for. I hope you would consider donating those raised funds to other freedom fighting causes or are still on the fight!
In another important legal battle— Feds 4 Medical Freedom just got the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to put the vaccine injunction for federal employees back in place and rehearing the case En Banc. Grassroots efforts with no major donors and there are a lot of other great causes that likely deserve your platform to get the word out!
Feds4MedFreedom.org
Article on their case:
https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2022/06/appeals-court-further-delays-enforcement-bidens-vaccine-mandate-feds-until-least-fall/368673/
Why is Jordan your enemy here? If all is fine and good and you will still deliver on your promise, can you not just prove him wrong? Frankly, I really enjoy your snark, but often it comes out in what looks like an uncalled for overreaction and less like intrepid journalism that refuses to compromise.
I don't really care what you think about Jordan. I can form my opinions about him by myself. I DO care about your response to the SUBSTANCE of his criticism. Please set your ego aside for a minute and address these legitimate, adult concerns like a legitimate adult. Saying stuff like “NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT,” just brings up more questions than answers. Not helpful, even with the Caps Lock.
Anyway, I'm here with the popcorn waiting to be convinced things are fine, but I can't say it looks like you're winning here. I really appreciated your Unreported Truths and Pandemia books. I'm not your enemy, but I can't exactly call myself a fan at this point either.
Alex..I have not always agreed with you. ie ivermectin BUT......I hope you take Twitter to the cleaners. I hope you make a shit ton of money. I believe you when you said you would shine the light on them. YOU FOUGHT and didn't quit. Haters are gonna hate. Sorry...but fuck 'em
Disappointed in this decision.
We had all wanted--needed--the discovery phase of the suit.
Extra disappointed considering my paid subscription was just renewed.
I guess I'll make a note on next year's calendar to cancel at that time.
Hoping you have a reasonable explanation, Alex.
Quote from Alex… “ I won’t be able to say much about the specifics of the settlement, as those are largely confidential.”
Alex may have won but we, who helped fund this fight to discover, will never know. This may be a win for Alex but a loss for mankind.
This was always published as a fight to get to the truth. A settlement with a confidentiality clause does not get to the truth.
Alex, again… you let us down.
Pharma/DOD/CIA/CCP/PLA made Twitter an offer they couldn't refuse.
Twitter made Berenson an offer he couldn't refuse.
Meanwhile millions are being maimed and killed by dangerous vaccines.
See my June 3 comment in response to “Update Berenson v. Twitter” dated June 2. Don’t hate on Alex, this is how these matters proceed. He achieved a great deal by bringing the action in the first instance. Remember, it’s a marathon, not a sprint.
I want to quote from here:
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/update-on-berenson-v-twitter-6ae
"Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
So not all hope is lost but it seems that this settlement was already in the works when the above mentioned post was created.
You have been a voice of truth and enlightenment re: Covid-19 and the vax for many, and for that you are a national treasure. I don't like your views on Trump, or Ivermectin. I think you have seen through the Fog of Propaganda on Covid-19 exceedingly well, but you haven't made your way through the fog yet on those issues.
I have never seen anything that indicates you are dishonest, or anything but genuine in your assertions and convictions. So, I believe your earlier mailing where you indicate that you will not settle if you are gagged (unless and until proven wrong).
You are one of the good ones, and we shouldn't rush to assume (as is the norm in today's world).
The lesson here is that everyone in media these days (and just about everywhere else), including Alex, adopts the primary moral principle to put as much money in their bank account as possible to help fund their early retirement and make them feel higher in the social dominance hierarchy.
But while they engage in that primary pursuit, they adopt certain topical interests and biases that are generally authentic (because faking it would be too difficult to hide) and feed the interests of certain media consumers.
I have said this before but the people of the US lost their moral compass for being principled above what they think they can get away with to improve their wealth and power when Bill Clinton sat there on national TV and told his baldfaced lie that he did not have sex with that woman Ms. Lewinski. In that single act the leader of the free world let it be known that it was okay to lie, cheat and steal as long as you can get away with it.
So today Alex, assuming he took the Twitter cash, can only be criticized as being a normal modern moral person while being lauded as writing good stuff.
When did we become a world of stunted, emotionally reactive infants?
Alex tried to tell you the truth about COVID, for FREE, while you paid the govt to lie to you.
Redirect your anger, and….CALM DOWN.
Alex, this is not right if you don't at least provide some context. You know exactly what the reason for the donations in this lawsuit was. Like it or not, this will otherwise make you look like a grifter!
Alex.
I trust you. I am glad you got what you needed. If the last two years doesn’t prove you don’t sell out, then I don’t know what would have.
These idiots that are screaming, they will look like asses.
I agree Alex. People need to slow the heck down.
Settlements are typically secret are continually negotiated from day one of the filing. Always keep the door open but keep fighting. I believe that Twitter settled because they were going to lose their section 230 if their partnership with the Governments were exposed with docs that Alex subpoenaed eg propaganda machine of totalitarian Government. The dummies don't realize that if Twitter was solely acting alone without Government direction and support, its a slam dunk against Alex. Since Governments are directly working with Twitter to censor, censure, and otherwise curtail content, Twitter is no longer acting independently as a private company, but an arm of the Government propaganda machine. The legal question to be answered would need to be answered is whether Twitter acted in concert with the Government and to what degree. Eg Depositions, discovery for several years. We are all stuck waiting to hear what we can from Alex as he is the aggrieved party. I doubt Alex would settle for less that pious intentions especially after all the money that is needed to litigate. Remember Justice is not free and neither are attorneys. After what they do to all of us? us = people who are banned from Twitter cause the Government doesn't like us. I would totally stick it to Twitter for as much and as far I could get. I would force do quite a few things plus lots of cash = eg litigation is expensive and I would also want a retirement. Its always cheaper for a company to settle than it is to litigate period. You have to determine what your chances of successful litigation are eg business decision (non emotional) Twitter had to decide if the risk of litigating and losing is worth not settling in the short term. My bet is that Twitter recognized that if private company documents were released showing Government collusion would do more damage (not that it isn't severely damaged) to their brand than settling for copious amounts of money and some other piddly stuff and it would push them closer to being liable for the section 230 loss. eg (Alex is blue checked and can never be banned for anything he says; an apology letter or various as sundry of small things).
Alex is blameless in the sense is he is accomplishing what he set out to do. His settlement is not a statement of his desire to not stick it to Twitter. Its a reflection of how desperate Twitter is and probability of a long costly litigation of which Twitter has superior resources and endless cash to throw down. I could be totally wrong. Allow the process to continue and wait.
Just a thought…
Until the settlement is finalized and accepted by the court, it’s not done.
A settlement doesn’t mean Alex “folded”….or that Twitter folded…
Let’s act like adults and get the facts…
All Alex has said is that apparently there is a settlement and he can’t talk about it at this point…. That’s it
We don't know what the details are. So there's no value in bashing anyone until we hear.
If this results in a total change in Twitter policies, and numerous people are allowed back on Twitter, then anyone who donated (I didn't) should be very happy.
If it results in only Alex being allowed back on Twitter - especially if any details of the settlement are agreed to be confidential - then anyone who donated should feel like a total sucker.
Complete confidence here that Berenson is an honest broker . He was one of the few who went up against the pharma industrial complex on MRNA jabs and the data proves him right .
The promise by Alex was disclosure and transparency of twitters behavior and the possible collusion with government. If in the end, Alex gets a paycheck and is required under agreement to keep everything he and his attorneys learned under wraps, then we have a ethical/character problem with Alex. However, I cannot discount the positive work he has done. I will give him time for rebuttal. But it certainly does not reflect well on him at this moment. Let's see what hsppens.
Jumpy, Jumpy, JUMPY!
Wow- LOTS of conclusions being drawn without much evidence.
I thought this group was different, or are those people withholding comment, pending further developments?
Aside from that, I *think* Alex is smarter than many of you are giving him credit for. Plus he has a mischievous side as a provocateur.
You really think he'd post something like this and leave it at that?
Hmmm...
Time and again the first reaction to any news is "Ready, Fire, Aim! " Everyone wants to be first with their hot take. Let this play out before you commit to a narrative.
I hate when we fight people on the same team. Jordan is a great reporter but should give Alex the benefit of the doubt. Just like Alex should give Malone the benefit of the doubt. The 3 libs on the SCOTUS always stay united no matter what even when they live in fantasyland. Our side would do much better staying united in this fight.
"NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT" - Exactly. Yet, the stated purpose of your suit was to bring Twitter's censorship apparatus into spotlight and you can't/won't release details of the settlement of a suit you fundraised for.
Mr Bluecheck has a point here. He doesn't have to call you a grifter. Your actions are making you look like one.
We trust you Alex.
Next up - Twitter receives government bailout to cover settlement? Free, fact checked speech comes with a price tag.
Until and unless we know what's in the settlement, how can *any* of us comment intelligently on the settlement?
How are our critical comments much different from the alphabet legacy media's obsession with being "first" at the expense of being "right"?
Was the settlement such that you can't talk about the settlement? If that's the case, then you are a “GRIFTER EXTRAORDINAIRE” if you got to make the discovery you mentioned which was so crucial to the whole lawsuit in the first place, then the settlement is acceptable to me. Just shed light on everything you found out in discovery.
Shouldn't we all reserve judgement until the terms of the settlement are known. If he chooses or is forced to keep them secret then he has betrayed our trust. We supported exposing Twitter; justice; and freedom of speech via the Alex Berenson lawsuit. If the settlement doesn't include these items then shame on us for trusting him.
Seems a little grift-y. We donated money and what do we get to see at the end of it all...not a damn thing. Nothing. Case settled, can't share any details. What was it all for?
Alex, you're a magnet for screwballs.
THIS is the problem with Twitter: unfettered nuttiness. No civil discourse. No intelligent exchange of opinions.
I can't stand the shrieking and that's why I don't have a Twitter account.
Alex…not sure what these poster are thinking, but forcing Twitter to settle and get compensated for your loss of readership and income seems to be about all an individual can do…hopefully sets up precedents against Twitter…
How else would you punish a company into better behaviors other than money or legislation…
Pretty sure you never said you were taking Legislative action.
Some confused people on this thread about winning a settlement as punishment and therefore a grifter???
Alex, anyone who has been following you knows not to believe any of that nonsense.
I subscribe to both of these Substacks and this type of "internet battle" is beneath someone.
"As we debate the power and political influence of social media companies, this discovery offers a unique opportunity to see how Twitter and the federal government and others may have colluded against my voice. No one else has this chance. No one.
And I am not going to give it up.
Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."