Senator Eric Schmitt: Exposing the Biggest Censorship Scandal in US History
In this episode of All-In, Senator Eric Schmitt and David Sacks examine government involvement in online content moderation, focusing on the Hunter Biden laptop story and its implications. Through discussion of Schmitt's lawsuit, Biden v. Missouri, they explore how various government agencies communicated with tech companies to influence content removal, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The conversation covers the relationship between government agencies and social media platforms, including how the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency shifted from its original purpose of protecting against cyberattacks to monitoring social media posts. They also discuss the role of former government officials who transitioned to positions at tech companies, and how these connections affected content moderation decisions during the 2020 election period.
This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Aug 20, 2025 episode of the All-In with Chamath, Jason, Sacks & Friedberg
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
1-Page Summary
Censorship of Hunter Biden Laptop and Government's Role
The controversy surrounding the Hunter Biden laptop story has raised significant questions about government involvement in censoring public discourse. According to Eric Schmitt, while the FBI had possession of Hunter Biden's authentic laptop since November 2019, they publicly labeled it as Russian disinformation. David Sacks points out that James Baker, a former FBI official who moved to Twitter, advocated for censoring the story despite likely knowing its legitimacy. This censorship, Sacks argues, provided advantages to the Biden campaign during the 2020 election.
Legal and Investigative Efforts to Expose Censorship
Senator Eric Schmitt's lawsuit, Biden v. Missouri, has revealed extensive coordination between government agencies and tech companies. The discovery process uncovered thousands of documents showing communication between tech companies and government officials. Key figures, including Anthony Fauci and FBI agent Elvis Chan, were deposed, revealing efforts to monitor and suppress speech. Schmitt notes that the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), originally meant to protect against cyberattacks, was repurposed to flag social media posts during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Free Speech, Democracy, and the Government-Social Media Relationship
David Sacks and Senator Schmitt discuss how government pressure on social media platforms threatens First Amendment principles. They explain that various agencies, including the CDC and FBI, effectively bypassed direct censorship restrictions by pressuring social media companies to remove content. Sacks argues that this compliance undermines social media's role as an independent platform for diverse perspectives. The discussion extends to how the "Russiagate" narrative, which Schmitt calls a hoax, was used to silence dissent and has contributed to increased political polarization, making nuanced discussion more difficult.
1-Page Summary
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- The FBI's characterization of the Hunter Biden laptop as potential disinformation could be seen as a standard precautionary measure in the context of heightened concerns about foreign interference in U.S. elections.
- The actions of James Baker and others at Twitter could be defended as an attempt to prevent the spread of potentially hacked or illegally obtained material, in line with company policies on privacy and hacked materials.
- The benefit to the Biden campaign from the suppression of the laptop story is not conclusively proven to be a direct result of censorship; other factors could have influenced the election outcome.
- Coordination between government agencies and tech companies could be part of legitimate efforts to protect national security and public health, rather than an attempt to suppress free speech.
- Communication between tech companies and government officials does not necessarily imply wrongdoing; it could be part of routine engagement on policy and security issues.
- Depositions of Anthony Fauci and Elvis Chan might reveal efforts to monitor speech that could be justified as attempts to combat misinformation during a public health crisis.
- The repurposing of CISA to flag social media posts could be seen as an adaptation to the evolving nature of cybersecurity threats, which now include misinformation campaigns that can impact public health and safety.
- Government pressure on social media platforms could be interpreted as guidance to combat misinformation and protect the public, rather than a violation of First Amendment rights.
- The removal of content by social media companies at the behest of government agencies might be part of efforts to ensure the integrity and safety of online discourse.
- The role of social media as an independent platform does not absolve it of the responsibility to prevent the spread of harmful misinformation.
- The "Russiagate" narrative, while controversial, may have been based on genuine concerns about foreign interference, and its impact on political polarization is complex and multifaceted.
- Nuanced discussion being more difficult could be attributed to a variety of factors, including broader societal and political dynamics, not solely the "Russiagate" narrative.
Actionables
- You can diversify your information sources to mitigate the impact of potential censorship by following independent journalists and international news outlets. By doing so, you'll expose yourself to a broader range of perspectives and stories that might not be covered by mainstream media. For example, subscribe to newsletters from journalists who specialize in media analysis or follow news platforms from different political or cultural backgrounds.
- Develop critical thinking skills to better assess information by practicing fact-checking techniques. Start by cross-referencing news stories with multiple sources, looking for original documents, and checking the credibility of the information providers. This habit will help you form your own opinions rather than relying on potentially biased narratives.
- Engage in constructive dialogue with people who have different viewpoints to foster nuanced discussion. You can join online forums or local community groups that encourage respectful debate. By actively listening and sharing thoughts in these settings, you'll contribute to breaking down polarization and promoting understanding.
Get access to the context and additional materials
Censorship of Hunter Biden Laptop and Government's Role
The role of the FBI and intelligence agencies in the suppression and discrediting of the Hunter Biden laptop story has become a controversial issue, raising questions about censorship and government intervention in public discourse.
Fbi and Intel Suppressed and Discredited Authentic Hunter Biden Laptop Story
FBI Held Hunter Biden's Genuine Laptop Since Nov 2019, Claimed It Was Russian Disinformation
According to Eric Schmitt, the FBI had possession of Hunter Biden's laptop since November 2019. Despite knowing it was authentic, the FBI agent involved in the case pre-emptively labeled the laptop story as Russian disinformation. Schmitt points out this discrepancy, highlighting the disconnect between the FBI's internal knowledge of the laptop’s authenticity and the external claim of it being Russian disinformation.
FBI and Intelligence Pressured Social Media to Censor Hunter Biden Laptop Story As Russian Propaganda
David Sacks discusses the role of James Baker, who had served at the FBI before moving to Twitter, in advocating for the censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story. Sacks argues that Baker, given his previous FBI experience, should have known that the laptop was legitimate and belonged to Hunter Biden. Nevertheless, the story was censored under the guise that the laptop was Russian disinformation, illustrating how such labeling can be utilized to suppress speech.
Biden Campaign Gained Advantage In 2020 By Blocking Laptop Evidence Access
Sacks furth ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Censorship of Hunter Biden Laptop and Government's Role
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- The FBI's characterization of the laptop as potential Russian disinformation could have been based on standard cautionary procedures in the context of heightened concerns about foreign interference in U.S. elections.
- Social media companies operate with their own policies and may have had reasons beyond government pressure to limit the spread of the Hunter Biden laptop story, such as adherence to their misinformation or hacked materials policies.
- The Biden campaign's actions regarding the laptop story could be seen as a standard political strategy to mitigate potentially damaging narratives, which is common practice in political campaigns.
- James Baker's role in the censorship of the laptop story at Twitter could be interpreted as him acting in accordance with the company's policies and the information available to him at the time, rather than as a deliberate attempt to suppress the s ...
Actionables
- You can enhance your media literacy by researching the origins and credibility of news stories before sharing them. Start by checking multiple sources and looking for original reporting on the issue. For example, if you come across a controversial political story, compare how different news outlets report on it and check fact-checking websites to see if the claims have been verified or debunked.
- Develop a habit of using critical thinking when encountering potential disinformation by asking probing questions. When you read a story that makes significant claims, take a step back and consider the motives behind the information, who benefits from it, and whether there's evidence to support the claims. For instance, if a story seems to be pushing a particular narrative, try to find out who is behind it and what their track record is for reliability.
- Encourage open dialogue with friends ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
Legal and Investigative Efforts to Expose Censorship
Legal and investigative developments are bringing to light evidence of coordination between the government and tech companies to suppress certain kinds of speech, raising concerns over First Amendment rights.
Biden V. Missouri: AG Schmitt Sues Over Government-Social Media Censorship Collusion
Discovery Reveals Thousands of Documents and Emails Showing Coordination Between Government and Tech Companies
Senator Eric Schmitt, when serving as the Attorney General of Missouri, initiated a case against the Biden administration, dubbed Biden v. Missouri. Schmitt’s lawsuit suggests that there has been collusion between the government and big tech companies to censor certain viewpoints, an action he characterizes as crossing the line beyond permissible government activity. The discovery process in this lawsuit unearthed a vast array of communications, including tens of thousands of documents and emails that exhibit coordination between tech companies and government officials.
Deposed Figures: Fauci and FBI Agent Chan Revealing Efforts to Suppress Speech
The lawsuit has led to the depositions of high-profile figures such as Anthony Fauci and FBI agent Elvis Chan, who have been involved in efforts to monitor and potentially suppress speech. Schmitt points to text messages from Rob Flaherty, the deputy communications director at the White House, as evidence that pressure to increase censorship was coming from high government levels.
Furthermore, Schmitt refers to Elvis Chan’s involvement in briefings with tech companies surrounding topics like the Hunter Biden laptop story, suggesting an intention to guide the narrative on social and mainstream media.
Schmitt's Lawsuit and Musk's "Twitter Files" Reveal Censorship Campaign Scale
In the course of the lawsuit, Schmitt emphasizes that the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was designed to protect against cyberattacks but ended up being repurposed. According to Schmitt, under the guise of fighting Russian disinformation, CISA collaborated with academic projects to flag social media posts, which during the COVID-19 pandemic shi ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Legal and Investigative Efforts to Expose Censorship
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- The coordination between government and tech companies could be seen as an effort to combat misinformation and protect public discourse rather than suppress free speech.
- The lawsuit's findings might be interpreted differently, with the communications between government officials and tech companies being part of standard public-private cooperation in addressing issues like misinformation or national security threats.
- The volume of documents and emails might not necessarily indicate wrongdoing but could reflect the extensive nature of communication required in complex digital governance issues.
- High-profile figures like Fauci and Chan may argue that their actions were in line with their duties to protect public health and security, not to suppress speech.
- The White House's communications could be part of broader efforts to ensure accurate information dissemination during a public health crisis.
- Briefings with tech companies by government officials like Elvis Chan could be standard practice for discussing security measures and not necessarily about controlling narratives.
- CISA's involvement with academic projects to flag social media posts could be part of legitimate efforts to identify and mitigate foreign disinformation campaigns.
- The repurposing of CISA's role might be seen as a necessary adaptation to emerging threats in the digital information space, such as ...
Actionables
- You can enhance your digital literacy by learning how to identify potential censorship indicators on social media platforms. Start by observing patterns such as the sudden disappearance of certain topics or voices, changes in the visibility of posts, or alterations in platform policies that seem to target specific types of content. Keep a journal to note these observations and compare them over time to understand the landscape of digital discourse.
- Develop a habit of diversifying your information sources to mitigate the impact of potential censorship. Instead of relying on a single platform or media outlet, curate a list of varied sources, including international news, independent journalists, and subject matter experts from different fields. This approach will help you cross-reference information and form a more rounded perspective on current events.
- Engage in constructive conversations with you ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
Free Speech, Democracy, and the Government-Social Media Relationship
David Sacks and Senator Eric Schmitt delve into the relationship between government entities and social media platforms, voicing concerns on how this interaction may threaten principles of free speech established under the First Amendment.
Government Push on Social Media to Censor Content Threatens First Amendment Principles
Outsourcing Censorship To Companies Let the Government Bypass Direct Censorship Restrictions
David Sacks and Senator Schmitt discuss the idea that the government is exerting pressure on social media companies to remove content, which they interpret as a type of de facto censorship. Schmitt points out how various agencies, including the CDC and FBI, had been pressuring social media platforms to censor content, effectively sidestepping the direct censorship restrictions imposed on the government. They mention government officials like Jen Psaki flagging content for Facebook and talk of a disinformation governance board to bolster their argument.
Government-Tech Collusion Undermines Social Media's Role as "Fourth Estate" and Diverse Platform
Sacks argues that when social media companies yield to government directives, it challenges the principle of these platforms serving as the "fourth estate," undermining their role as an independent venue for diverse perspectives. Schmitt furthers the discussion by considering the potential Orwellian implications of big tech's compliance and the role of NGOs in indirect methods of government-promoted censorship, which could affect the integrity of social media.
Erosion of Free Speech and Spread of Disinformation Harm Discourse and Trust
"Russiagate" Saga, Based On False Claims, Escalates US-Russia Tensions
They touch on the "Russia ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Free Speech, Democracy, and the Government-Social Media Relationship
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- Government engagement with social media may be a necessary measure to protect public discourse from misinformation and harmful content.
- Social media platforms have a responsibility to moderate content to ensure a safe and reliable space for users, which may sometimes align with government interests.
- The relationship between government and tech companies can be seen as a form of public-private partnership aimed at tackling complex issues like hate speech and election interference.
- The "Russiagate" narrative, while controversial, was based on investigations by reputable intelligence agencies and led to legitimate concerns about foreign interference in election ...
Actionables
- You can diversify your news sources to include international and independent media to get a broader perspective on global events. By actively seeking out news from different countries and independent journalists, you'll be able to compare narratives and identify potential biases or omissions in mainstream coverage. For example, if you're following a story that's predominantly covered by your national media, try finding what media outlets in other countries are reporting about the same issue.
- Start a personal "truth log" where you document stories or claims you come across, along with your research on their validity. This habit encourages critical thinking and helps you track how narratives evolve over time. For instance, when you hear a new claim related to international relations, jot it down and list the sources that support or refute it. Over time, you'll have a personal record of how certain stories were presented and how your understanding of them changed with more information.
- Engage in conversat ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
Create Summaries for anything on the web
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser
