Twitter Files journalist Matt Taibbi slammed House Democrats for their "comically inept" attacks during a heated Capitol Hill hearing last week.
Taibbi joined "The Brian Kilmeade Show" on Monday to discuss his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, where he addressed key revelations from the Twitter Files, including allegations of government censorship.
"I expected them to attack us, but they were really comically inept attacks and cut off any attempt to engage in any kind of conversation about the material and really just tried to get us to… admit that Russian interference happened," Taibbi told Brian Kilmeade.
MATT TAIBBI CALLS OUT ‘CENSORSHIP-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX’ IN LATEST TWITTER FILES
"They tried to talk about my sourcing, which was very strange, and they called us a direct threat to people who oppose them, which is… the kind of thing they complained about with when Donald Trump was president," he continued. "If he had said that to a journalist, can you imagine what the reaction would have been?"
Some Democrats were accused of heckling Taibbi to reveal his sources, including Rep. Sylvia Garcia, D-Texas, and Ranking Member Stacey Plaskett, D-Virgin Islands.
Taibbi and fellow journalist Michael Shellenberger were labeled "so-called journalists" at one point by Plaskett, while Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, D-Fla., accused Taibbi of profiting off of the Twitter Files reporting. Taibbi rejected the claim.
Taibbi said the government worked with a series of friendly media outlets, and other organizations, to monitor online information ranging from the Hunter Biden laptop story to the efficacy of the COVID vaccine.
MATT TAIBBI TO TESTIFY TWITTER FILES SHOW AMERICANS ARE IN DANGER OF LOSING FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS
Taibbi suggested the government would expect the news organizations to comply, or they could expect bad press as a result.
"The media, which should be a check on the system, instead of investigating any of these groups, they partnered with them," Taibbi said.
"So if all else failed, if the government failed to get somebody removed, if an NGO failed to get somebody removed, the next step would be they would go to a friendly reporter at the Times, the Post, the Financial Times or any other any of a dozen publications who in turn would call a company like Twitter and say, 'Why haven't you removed these 15 accounts? And can you tell us by the end of the day, if you're going to do that or not?'"
"The company learned that if they didn't do that, they could expect some bad headlines by the next day, so that was they became part of the system, essentially, which is a total breakdown of what the role of the press should be," he continued.
Critics have worried the bombshell Twitter Files signaled a broader indication of the government's infringement upon First Amendment rights as questions continue to linger surrounding the overreach.
And as a result, some Democrats are even moving away from the party citing its "intolerance for civil liberties," Taibbi noted.
"I think the hearing exposed some things about the change in the Democratic Party and its intolerance for civil liberties, which is a new thing," he said. "It's one of the things that attracted a lot of us to the Democratic Party once upon a time, and seeing the way that played out, I think changed a lot of minds."
