[tptacek]

Once again, my argument is simple:

1. There is clear evidence that Epstein holds a grudge against Google based on the quarantine they put on his website.

2. It is not clear that this grudge determines his opinion about Google's influence on elections.

3. However, the grudge is relevant information in anyone's consideration of Epstein's opinions. Do with it what you will.

[ryacko]

1. The evidence shows that Epstein was angered by Google’s actions, but there is no evidence of his present emotional state. I don’t know anyone who would be angry for seven years for an automated notation warning caution for their own website.

2. Yes, but it is not even clear he holds this opinion or is being paid to parrot viewpoints he is paid for.

3. No evidence there is a grudge, see my argument in item #1.

[tptacek]

Let's again be clear that Google's "actions" here seem to sum up to:

1. Noticing that this guy's site was serving malware --- which Epstein was later forced to concede that it was.

2. Putting a warning on the search engine referral.