FBI primed Twitter execs to censor NY Post's Hunter Biden laptop story, Twitter Files reveal

Teresa Kroeger / Contributor, South_agency | Getty Images

"The press doing the bidding of the government is what they had in Soviet Russia or what they have in China and North Korea today. Without a free and independent press, you can’t have a free and independent civilization."

Glenn recently wrote that in response to the "Twitter Files" and the continued unveiling of the depth of Big Tech's affair with intelligence agencies. As Part 7 of the Twitter files just dropped, we learn that Twitter was "doing the bidding" of the FBI to censor the New York Post's Hunter Biden laptop story.

This installment of the "Twitter Files" was covered by Michael Schellenberger, the bestselling author of Apocalypse Never and San Fransicko, revealing the FBI primed Twitter to censor the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story both before AND after it was published.

It all began in a Delaware computer shop...

In December 2019, Delaware computer store owner, John Paul (J.P.) Mac Issac contacted the FBI over a computer that was left at his store. This computer was owned by none other than Hunter Biden, whose computer contained damning evidence of criminal activity, from international bribery to illicit drug activity. As the evidence incriminated both Hunter Biden and his father, then-Senator Joe Biden, Mac Isaac contacted federal authorities. On Dec 9, 2019, the FBI issued a subpoena and took Hunter Biden's laptop from Mac Issac's shop. The below tweet contains both copies of the FBI subpoena and Peter Schweizer's explanation of Hunter Biden's illicit dealings revealed in the abandoned laptop.

For almost a year, Mac Isaac never heard back from the FBI about the subpoenaed laptop. Unbeknownst to the FBI, Mac Isaac had made a copy of the computer onto a new hard drive, and, wanting answers to what he uncovered on the laptop, he contacted former NYC Mayor and Trump advisor Rudy Giuliani in August 2020. Giuliani subsequently gave the story to the New York Post, which, on October 14, 2020, published the smoking-gun evidence concerning Hunter Biden's criminal activity in THIS bombshell article.

The evidence of then-Presidential candidate Joe Biden's knowledge of his son's illicit business deals and criminal activity had the potential to alter the 2020 election, which was less than a month away from the date of publication. Yet within several hours after publishing, the article vanished into thin air. If its disappearance didn't eliminate the possibility of political debate about this key information about a Presidential candidate, Big Tech hammered the nail in the coffin by labeling the story as "Russian propaganda." A month later, Joe Biden was elected President of the United States...

Within several hours after publishing, the article vanished into thin air.

...What happened?

The cover-up Conservatives have been fighting for years

Since 2020, conservatives have been called conspiracy theorists for accusing the deep state and Big Tech of conspiring to take down the potentially election-altering story. Today, they were proven true in Part 7 of the Twitter files.

Let's back up to October 13th, the day before the New York Post published its bombshell article about Hunter Biden's laptop. On the 13th, the New York Post informed Hunter Biden and his lawyer, George Mesires, that they would be running the story the next day. Several minutes later, just before 7 pm, Mesires contacted Mac Isaac, requesting to review the copy of the hard drive containing the damning evidence against his client.

Coincidentally, at 9:22 pm, just several hours later, FBI special Agent Elvis Chan sent a 10-page document to Yoel Roth, Twitter’s then-Head of Site Integrity, through Teleporter, a pre-existing one-way communications channel from the FBI to Twitter. The next day, Twitter, under Roth's supervision, took down the New York Post article on the grounds that it was potentially sourced from Russian hacking.

How was Roth so quick to come to that conclusion?

The FBI primes Twitter to consider the New York Post article "Russian propaganda"

As it turns out, the FBI had been priming Roth and others at Twitter for MONTHS to consider the New York Post article "Russian propaganda" in preparation for its publishing. In Dec 2020 after the Presidential election, Roth gave the following statement in a sworn declaration:

Since 2018, I have had weekly meetings with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and industry peers regarding election security. During these weekly meetings, federal law enforcement communicated that they expected "hand-and leak-operations" by state actors might occur in the period shortly before the 2020 presidential election, likely in October. I was told in these meetings that the intelligence community expected that individuals associated with political campaigns would be subject to hacking attacks and that material obtained through those hacking attacks would likely be disseminated over social media platforms, including Twitter. These expectations of hack-and-leak operations wee discussed throughout 2020. I also learned through these meetings that there were rumors that a hack-and-leak operation would involve Hunter Biden.

Roth disclosed under oath that the FBI and intelligence agencies warned him directly throughout 2020 of anticipated "hack-and-leak" operations, which would occur right before the 2020 election, most likely in October, and would involve Hunter Biden. Sound at all like the New York Post article?

But wait... there's more!

The FBI's effort to prime Twitter execs to view the New York Post article as a "hack-and-leak" operation didn't stop there.

On August 11, 2020, Elvis Chan, the same FBI agent who sent Roth the 10-page document the night before the New York Post article was published, shared information with Roth relating to the Russian hacking organization, APT28. The FBI again carried out this communication through the FBI and Twitter's one-way direct communication channel, Teleporter.

In a recent interview, Roth disclosed how he was primed to consider the New York Post's Hunter Biden laptop story as an APT28 operation based on the information he received from the FBI. He said, "It set off every single one of my finely tuned APT28 hack-and-leap campaign alarm bells."

Furthermore, in September 2020, Roth participated in an Aspen Institute “tabletop exercise" on a potential "Hack-and-Dump" operation relating to Hunter Biden. As Schellenberger reports, "The goal was to shape how the media covered it — and how social media carried it." The event was organized by Vivian Schiller the former CEO of NPR, the former general manager of the New York Times, and the former Chief Digital Officer of NBC News. Attendees included Meta/Facebook's head of security policy, and top national security reporters from the New York Times, the Washington Post, and others.

Fast forward to October 13, 2020, when Roth received a 10-page document about the New York Post story about Hunter Biden being published the next day, a month before the election. Though Roth admitted the story "isn’t clearly violative of our Hacked Materials Policy, nor is it clearly in violation of anything else," he concluded the story "feels a lot like a somewhat subtle leak operation.” He had been primed the entire year to come to that conclusion.

He had been primed the entire year to come to that conclusion

There's even more corruption between Twitter and the FBI revealed in Part 7 of the "Twitter Files." Schellenberger revealed that the now-fired deputy general counsel and former FBI agent Jim Baker celebrated Twitter's accomplishment of earning more than $3 million from the FBI since 2019. Internal communications also revealed Twitter had a Slack channel called "Bu Alumni" specifically for the sheer number of former FBI employees working at Twitter and that the FBI gave Roth and other Twitter employees top security clearance to share intelligence between the two "agencies."

So what have we learned from Part 7 of the Twitter Files?

First, we learn that we were right. Conservatives have been gaslit to believe that they were "conspiracy theorists" for arguing that there was a concerted effort to censor content that threatened the woke establishment leading up to the 2020 election, like the Hunter Biden laptop story. It turns out this "conspiracy theory" was a real conspiracy.

Second, as Glenn said while covering the Twitter Files, we learn Big Tech's adulterous affair with the deep state threatens two of the most sacred pillars enshrined in the U.S. Constitution: the right to freedom of speech, and the right to free and fair elections. As Glenn recently said, Twitter and the FBI "subverted the constitutionally mandated process of free and fair elections."

These questions still need answers...

So that's what we have learned... but what haven't we learned yet? Why did the FBI spend a whole year priming Big Tech and media execs to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story? When they obtained the laptop from Mac Isaac's computer shop, did they find evidence that they themselves were implicated in Joe and Hunter Biden's illicit business dealings? Are they trying to cover their own tracks just as much as they were determined to see Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 presidential election?

It would be naive to think that the FBI's effort to cover up the New York Post's story wasn't motivated by some degree of self-interest. The question remains—how deeply is their self-interest intertwined with what is contained in Hunter Biden's laptop? These questions need answers.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is America’s next generation trading freedom for equity?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?