So we’ve been bringing you the multi-layered saga of BLM co-founder Patrisse Kahn-Cullors and her buying of four different homes and looking, perhaps, to get another one in the Bahamas.

Here was the NY Post’s visual take on it all.

NY POST: Black Lives Manors pic.twitter.com/4cmKnp2luS

— Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) April 11, 2021

Now, one would think that all that is fair game. She’s a public figure, open to comment, praise and criticism just like any other public figure.

Or so we would think. But apparently, someone over at Twitter didn’t think so.

George Washington law professor Jonathan Turley raised the alarm that sports journalist and radio personality Jason Whitlock apparently was censored by Twitter for tweeting about Cullors buying her $1.4 million Topanga Canyon mini-compound.

.@WhitlockJason tells me Twitter just locked his account over this pic.twitter.com/WPxhi2p1aX

— Ryan Glasspiegel (@sportsrapport) April 9, 2021

The offending tweet which got Whitlock’s account locked said “Black Lives Matter founder buys $1.4 million home in Topanga, which has a black population of 1.4%. She’s with her people!” and then cited the original Dirt article that alerted people to her purchase.

Whitlock was likely reported to Twitter by someone unhappy with the tweet and someone behind the switch decided that saying someone bought a home in the Topanga Canyon area was somehow private information. Exactly how would that be? Cullors is a public figure and it’s like listing the city — you’re not listing an address or any real identifying information.

Bottom line? Some supporters of Cullors bombarded Twitter with reports. But this never should be flagged and the fact that they did flag it means they’re taking a political side. Yet again.

Others claimed they were nailed too for tweeting about the purchase.

Retweeted the same news…result.. pic.twitter.com/kTqtXC14nm

— Tacha B. (@Itsmzchampagne) April 10, 2021

This isn’t the first time that we’ve seen an uneven or unfair application of the “private information” offense that really was because someone on the left was offended. We saw it, for example, when the Project Veritas account was permanently banned just for posting a video at the front door of someone’s home without even saying what city they were in. That was deemed revealing “private information.”

We also saw the banning of the URL of the New York Post’s Hunter Biden story in October of last year and locking the New York Post out of their account for daring to report on Biden. They also censored the House Judiciary GOP account and suspended the Trump campaign account for sharing the URL. Of course, there was also the banning of President Donald Trump and a boatload of other accounts, sometimes for no explainable reason.

Turley notes that Whitlock is a critic of BLM who has been calling them out for a long time.

Whitlock apparently is a vocal critic of BLM which he has denounced as a scam and even compared to the KKK. One does not have to agree with such statements to support his right to speak freely without corporate censorship.

Indeed, the greatest irony may not be the home purchase by the corporate support. A professed Marxist, Cullors has not only been paid handsomely by corporations like Warner but is being actively protected by corporations like Twitter. When it comes to free speech, I support them both. The question is whether both have an equal opportunity to speak on platforms like Twitter.

They keep making the answer to that question clear.