One America News Network is launching their own social media platform and it could not be funnier.
"No ShadowBanning or blocking here!"
Imagine debuting a dime-store Parler, which is already a penny-store Twitter.
I wonder if the "24" in the name is a reference to Kobe—which, in that case, much respect for the heartfelt tribute.
Their origami bird or whatever is quite similar in concept to another social platform's bird imagery. I wonder if the legal masterminds at the network who managed to get sued by election software companies thought this one through.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is a favorite technique of braindead extremists: they hold up a hyperradical dirtbag and implicitly equate them with ordinary people who have broadly acceptable views.
Imaging arguing that because NICK FUENTES is having problems x, y, and z ... that means YOU will too.
A lot of people are interested in debating the legitimacy of putting Fuentes on a no fly. That’s neither what my tweet was about, nor a plausible thing to believe in the first place. Thus far the only “evidence” we have is his word, which means nothing given that’s he’s a scumbag
Blocked this loser for snitch-tagging to Fuentes, who commands a troll army like you wouldn’t believe.
This thread—which reaches its riotously discrediting climax by describing Bernie-supporting, Vox-podcasting @mattyglesias as a "fancy Rush Limbaugh"—is one of the dumbest things you'll ever read on this site.
Basically what's happening is that you have a Twitter subculture incapable of interpreting disagreement with progressive identitarian conceptions of race as anything other than red-pilled reactionary Limbaughism.
This group has lost the capacity to intelligently discriminate among the various forms of dissent they come across online. You've reached galactic levels of absurdity when your grand theory is that Matt Yglesias is Rush Limbaugh with a smile.
Gary Neville is a hysterical nut case. I don’t think anyone was this worked up about Hitler bombing London. He’s offered no real argument for why the Super League would be bad. Just that it would be a “monopoly,” which isn’t the case.
Getting a lot of good pushback on this. So I want to explain my reasons for thinking this is a good development.
First, an uncontroversial metric of soccer enjoyment is being able to see the biggest matches and best players. We all circle the big games on the calendar; we all tune in for the most exciting players.
This first argument is simple: The SL reliably gives us more of these games.
Am I going to run a correction to a *tweet* in which I blast Greenwald for boosting Revolver News without qualifying it as a cess pit of conspiratorial chuddery?
No, I don’t think I will.
I do lament the fact that, in conversation with one of my own editors, I was too dismissive of the possibility that the death wasn’t connected to Jan 6.
Greenwald was accidentally right. For a lot of people following the coverage, there was little reason to doubt the official narrative. Aside from just, you know, having a dorm room skepticism to “official narratives” to begin with.