But notice how he pretends he secretly agreed it should not be done, even though he proposed it and then did not agree that it was the wrong action at the time, which makes him look severly bonkers, as it should.
Hes just sane washing his own insane actions in his new book, recasting history to make excuses for his bad behavior.
He goes into partygate excuses as well, when his staff were breaking lockdown rules his government set, and claims “ohh, I didn’t even have cake at my party. It didn’t even occur to me it was a party without cake.”
Just complete bollocks.
My link goes into it, but thats what the court oversight commission in the state wants. An inhouse system where streams and their features are centrally controlled. They have not been able to get funding to stand that up, but they have been advocating for it.
Their current recommendation is that YouTube comments be disabled, but they don’t have the legal mandate to enforce that apparently. This judge’s shitty behaviour may help them make that case at least.