The latest installment of the Twitter Files revealed the FBI’s desire for Twitter to rely on it to be the belly button of the U.S. government (USG). The first Twitter Files installment of 2023 revealed shared the events that led up to the intelligence community’s influence on Twitter. Following that installment, journalist Matt Taibbi released another, which revealed the Global Engagement Center’s (GEC) role.
Taibbi described the GEC as “a fledgling analytic/intelligence arms of the State Department,” and screenshots revealed how this new entity would go directly to the media. In one such instance, a report titled, Russian Disinformation Apparatus Taking Advantage of Coronavirus Concerns, was released, which wrecked a bit of havoc for Twitter.
1.THREAD: The Twitter Files
Twitter and the FBI “Belly Button” pic.twitter.com/nfOGQGlvUM— Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) January 3, 2023
Twitter’s then Trust and Safety head, Yoel Roth, pointed out the motives of Clemson’s Media Forensic Hub when it complained that Twitter hadn’t “made a Russia attribution” in some time.
-->
Credit: Matt Taibbi
Credit: Matt Taibbi
Roth told researchers like Clemson that Twitter would be happy to work directly with them instead of the media. He was unsuccessful. Simultaneously, Twitter was trying to reduce the number of agencies that had access to Roth. Twitter’s then-policy director, Carlos Monje, pointed out that once Twitter gave these agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security, access to Roth.
“If these folks are like House Homeland Committee and DHS, once we give them direct contact with Yoel, they will want to come back to him again and again,” Monje said.
Taibbi noted that the GEC report appeared to be based on DHS data that was circulated earlier that week. The data included accounts that followed two or more Chinese diplomatic accounts and ended up with a list “nearly 250,000” names long. The list included Canadian officials and a CNN account.
Credit: Matt Taibbi
In an email, Roth said that the GEC attempted to insert itself into conversations Twitter had with several government agencies, including the FBI and DHS. The GEC began to agree to loop Twitter in before going public; however, the agency used a technique that trapped Twitter previously.
“The delta between when they share material and when they go to the press continues to be problematic,” a comms official wrote, adding that they primed the media to be “curios and inquisitive of this dynamic, too.”
Credit: Matt Taibbi
This led to Twitter’s disputing a State Department claim that China coordinated coronavirus disinformation accounts. The FBI then informed Twitter that the GEC wanted to be included in their regular “industry call” between companies like Twitter and Facebook and the DHS and FBI. At first, Twitter didn’t want to go this route. Executives at Facebook and Google were united with Twitter in its opposition to the GEC’s inclusion.
“The GEC’s mandate for offensive IO to promote American interests. The relative lack of discretion and caution from senior GEC leadership in sharing reports/analysis based on shaky methodology. A limited track record of successful collaboration with industry.”
Roth noted that an actor such as GEC being introduced to a stable and trusted group of practitioners and experts, especially with the election heating up, posed major risks.
-->
Credit: Matt Taibbi
Roth added that another reason was that the DHS and FBI were “apolitical,” whereas the GEC was “political.”
“GEC has a track record of actively advancing specific ideological agendas (e.g., their work w/r/t Iran). We should not lose sight of this distinction,” Roth wrote.
Credit: Matt Taibbi
The FBI argued for a compromise solution that would allow other U.S. government (USG) agencies to participate in the industry calls, with the FBI and DHS acting as sole conduits. When Roth reached out to FBI agent Elvis Chan with concerns, Chan reassured the Twitter executive that it would be a “one-way” channel and “State/GEC, NSA, and CIA have expressed interest in being allowed on in listen mode only.”
“We can give you everything we’re seeing from the FBI and USIC agencies,” Chan told Roth, adding that the DHS agency Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) “will know what’s going on in each state.” Chan then asked if the industry could “rely on the FBI to be the belly button of the USG.”
Credit: Matt Taibbi
The group eventually chose Signal due to its operational security. Following that, Twitter began taking requests from various government bodies starting with the Senate Intel Committee (SSCI), which needed reassurance that Twitter was taking FBI direction.
Twitter also received various requests from officials wanting individuals they didn’t like to be banned from the platform. In the screenshot below, the office for Democrat and House Intel Committee chief Adam Schiff asked Twitter to ban journalist Paul Sperry.
Credit: Matt Taibbi
At the time, Twitter refused. However, Sperry was later suspended. “No, this isn’t feasible/we don’t do this,” Twitter replied.
Twitter honored many of the requests, including those from the GEC, to ban accounts the GEC identified as “GRU-controlled” and linked “to the Russian government.”
-->A former CIA staffer working at Twitter called the GEC requests “Our window on that is closing,” which meant that the days Twitter could say no to serious requests were over. In the Twitter Files that were released earlier today, Taibbi noted that in public, Twitter would remove content at its “sole discretion.”
Privately, the platform would “off-board” anything that was “identified by the U.S. intelligence community as state-sponsored entity conducting cyber-operations.” That was in 2017. By 2020, agencies were flooding Twitter with “identifications” or users that it wanted Twitter to remove.
Credit: Matt Taibbi
Taibbi pointed out that some reports were only a paragraph long and that Twitter would be forwarded an Excel document without further explanation. Twitter was also warned about the publicity surrounding a book written by former Ukraine prosecutor Viktor Shokhin, who alleged “corruption by the U.S. government” – specifically by Joe Biden.
Screenshots reveal that by mere weeks before the 2020 election, Twitter was so confused by the multiple streams of incoming requests that staffers had to ask the FBI which was which.
Credit: Matt Taibbi
Taibbi noted that this led to the situation described in an earlier Twitter Files release by Michael Shellenberger on December 19, 2022.
In that release, it was revealed that Twitter was paid $3,415,323. Taibbi noted that Twitter wasn’t just paid but underpaid for the amount of work it did for the government.
Your feedback is welcome. If you have any comments or concerns or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter at @JohnnaCrider1.
-->Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. You can also follow Teslarati on LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s Starship FL launch site will witness scenes once reserved for sci-fi films
A Starship that launches from the Florida site could touch down on the same site years later.
The Department of the Air Force (DAF) has released its Final Environmental Impact Statement for SpaceX’s efforts to launch and land Starship and its Super Heavy booster at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station’s SLC-37.
According to the Impact Statement, Starship could launch up to 76 times per year on the site, with Super Heavy boosters returning within minutes of liftoff and Starship upper stages landing back on the same pad in a timeframe that was once only possible in sci-fi movies.
Booster in Minutes, Ship in (possibly) years
The EIS explicitly referenced a never-before-seen operational concept: Super Heavy boosters will launch, reach orbit, and be caught by the tower chopsticks roughly seven minutes after liftoff. Meanwhile, the Starship upper stage will complete its mission, whether a short orbital test, lunar landing, or a multi-year Mars cargo run, and return to the exact same SLC-37 pad upon mission completion.
“The Super Heavy booster landings would occur within a few minutes of launch, while the Starship landings would occur upon completion of the Starship missions, which could last hours or years,” the EIS read.
This means a Starship that departs the Florida site in, say, 2027, could touch down on the same site in 2030 or later, right beside a brand-new stack preparing for its own journey, as noted in a Talk Of Titusville report. The 214-page document treats these multi-year round trips as standard procedure, effectively turning the location into one of the world’s first true interplanetary spaceports.
-->Noise and emissions flagged but deemed manageable
While the project received a clean bill of health overall, the EIS identified two areas requiring ongoing mitigation. Sonic booms from Super Heavy booster and Starship returns will cause significant community annoyance” particularly during nighttime operations, though structural damage is not expected. Nitrogen oxide emissions during launches will also exceed federal de minimis thresholds, prompting an adaptive management plan with real-time monitoring.
Other impacts, such as traffic, wildlife (including southeastern beach mouse and Florida scrub-jay), wetlands, and historic sites, were deemed manageable under existing permits and mitigation strategies. The Air Force is expected to issue its Record of Decision within weeks, followed by FAA concurrence, setting the stage for rapid redevelopment of the former site into a dual-tower Starship complex.
SpaceX Starship Environmental Impact Statement by Simon Alvarez
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving (FSD) testing gains major ground in Spain
Based on information posted by the Dirección General de Tráfico (DGT), it appears that Tesla is already busy testing FSD in the country.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) program is accelerating across Europe, with Spain emerging as a key testing hub under the country’s new ES-AV framework program.
Based on information posted by the Dirección General de Tráfico (DGT), it appears that Tesla is already busy testing FSD in the country.
Spain’s ES-AV framework
Spain’s DGT launched the ES-AV Program in July 2025 to standardize testing for automated vehicles from prototypes to pre-homologation stages. The DGT described the purpose of the program on its official website.
“The program is designed to complement and enhance oversight, regulation, research, and transparency efforts, as well as to support innovation and advancements in automotive technology and industry. This framework also aims to capitalize on the opportunity to position Spain as a pioneer and leader in automated vehicle technology, seeking to provide solutions that help overcome or alleviate certain shortcomings or negative externalities of the current transportation system,” the DGT wrote.
The program identifies three testing phases based on technological maturity and the scope of a company’s operations. Each phase has a set of minimum eligibility requirements, and applicants must indicate which phase they wish to participate in, at least based on their specific technological development.
-->
Tesla FSD tests
As noted by Tesla watcher Kees Roelandschap on X, the DGT’s new framework effectively gives the green flight for nationwide FSD testing. So far, Tesla Spain has a total of 19 vehicles authorized to test FSD on the country’s roads, though it would not be surprising if this fleet grows in the coming months.
The start date for the program is listed at November 27, 2025 to November 26, 2027. The DGT also noted that unlimited FSD tests could be done across Spain on any national route. And since Tesla is already in Phase 3 of the ES-AV Program, onboard safety operators are optional. Remote monitoring would also be allowed.
Tesla’s FSD tests in Spain could help the company gain a lot of real-world data on the country’s roads. Considering the scope of tests that are allowed for the electric vehicle maker, it seems like Spain would be one of the European countries that would be friendly to FSD’s operations. So far, Tesla’s FSD push in Europe is notable, with the company holding FSD demonstrations in Germany, France, and Italy. Tesla is also pushing for national approval in the Netherlands in early 2026.
News
Tesla FSD V14.2.1 is earning rave reviews from users in diverse conditions
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) software continues its rapid evolution, with the latest V14.2.1 update drawing widespread praise.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) software continues its rapid evolution, with the latest V14.2.1 update drawing widespread praise for its smoother performance and smarter decision-making.
Videos and firsthand accounts from Tesla owners highlight V14.2.1 as an update that improves navigation responsiveness, sign recognition, and overall fluidity, among other things. Some drivers have even described it as “more alive than ever,” hinting at the system eventually feeling “sentient,” as Elon Musk has predicted.
FSD V14.2.1 first impressions
Early adopters are buzzing about how V14.2.1 feels less intrusive while staying vigilant. In a post shared on X, Tesla owner @LactoseLunatic described the update as a “huge leap forward,” adding that the system remains “incredibly assertive but still safe.”
Another Tesla driver, Devin Olsenn, who logged ~600 km on V14.2.1, reported no safety disengagements, with the car feeling “more alive than ever.” The Tesla owner noted that his wife now defaults to using FSD V14, as the system is already very smooth and refined.
Adverse weather and regulatory zones are testing grounds where V14.2.1 shines, at least according to testers in snow areas. Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt shared a video of his first snowy drive on unplowed rural roads in New Hampshire, where FSD did great and erred on the side of caution. As per Merritt, FSD V14.2.1 was “extra cautious” but it performed well overall.
-->Sign recognition and freeway prowess
Sign recognition also seemed to show improvements with FSD V14.2.1. Longtime FSD tester Chuck Cook highlighted a clip from his upcoming first-impressions video, showcasing improved school zone behavior. “I think it read the signs better,” he observed, though in standard mode, it didn’t fully drop to 15 mph within the short timeframe. This nuance points to V14.2.1’s growing awareness of temporal rules, a step toward fewer false positives in dynamic environments.
FSD V14.2.1 also seems to excel in high-stress highway scenarios. Fellow FSD tester @BLKMDL3 posted a video of FSD V14.2.1 managing a multi-lane freeway closure due to a police chase-related accident. “Perfectly handles all lanes of the freeway merging into one,” the Tesla owner noted in his post on X.
FSD V14.2.1 was released on Thanksgiving, much to the pleasant surprise of Tesla owners. The update’s release notes are almost identical to the system’s previous iteration, save for one line item read, “Camera visibility can lead to increased attention monitoring sensitivity.”
SpaceX’s Starship FL launch site will witness scenes once reserved for sci-fi films
Tesla Full Self-Driving (FSD) testing gains major ground in Spain
