POLITICO reporter @SchreckReports has a new book *confirming* the emails from Hunter Biden's laptop about Joe Biden's business deals in China & Ukraine are genuine.
People complaining about pre-election censorship by Google in Russia cheered Big Tech's censoring this reporting.
I have a copy of Schreckinger's important book and will write about it shortly. 2 points:
1) Kudos to him, as a young journalist, for reporting facts most in the corporate media don't want to hear.
2) Big Tech/Dem censorship of this story before the election was a grave assault
As a reminder, this is what happened:
* It was obvious from the start the Hunter docs were authentic.
* They concerned *Joe's* activities, not Hunter's.
* CIA lied, saying it was "Russian disinformation."
* Big Tech & media united to *censor* the reporting to protect Biden.
One last reminder: @theintercept -- founded in 2014, before the current editors arrived, to be *adversarial* to CIA/security state -- used an ex-NYT reporter to mindlessly endorse the CIA lie that the Hunter docs were "Russian disinformation" out of desperation to help Biden win.
The Intercept was founded on the view that it was urgent to have media outlets adversarial to the CIA's lies, and to counteract the NYT's form of reporting. Instead, its new editors hired NYT reporters to oversee coverage and endorse CIA's lies on Oct. 21
It's so easy to recognize and denounce the censorship, repression and propaganda in distant countries we're taught from childhood to hate (Russia). It's more more difficult -- and more important -- to recognize it in our own. Pre-election censorship of this story was a disgrace.
One final point: when Facebook announced that it would algorithmically suppress this reporting, it did so through a life-long Dem operative, @andymstone, who claimed it was being done only until they did a "fact-check" on the docs. It never came. Why? Because the docs were real.
Amazingly, Facebook and @andymstone -- having interfered in our elections by suppressing a story that the CIA, the Intercept and other media outlets lied about by claiming it was Russia disinformation -- now refuses to answer questions about the outcome of that "fact-check." 👇
I was on Joe Rogan's show the week Big Tech and the corporate media were using the CIA lie about the Hunter docs to censor. This was a few days before I quit the Intercept because they wouldn't let me write about it. It was so clear what was going on:
One interesting aspect of the fact that it's a POLITICO reporter with a new book confirming the authenticity of the Hunter docs:
It was POLITICO -- through the co-Queen of Russiagate frauds, @NatashaBertrand -- who first used CIA to dismiss the docs as "Russian disinformation."
Beyond the Intercept -- of all places -- laundering CIA lies to justify its refusal to allow reporting on the Biden archive, here were the two most repulsive examples.
1) The NPR Public Editor on why it refused to discuss the story:
2) CNN's @camanpour -- the week before the election -- explicitly refusing to discuss the reporting on the Biden family by claiming that it's not the media's job to determine if the documents are or are not authentic. Watch this shit:
Now that a reporter from POLITICO -- the first outlet to spread the lie that the Biden docs were "Russian disinformation" -- has confirmed their authenticity, we'll have a full video report tonight on @rumblevideo (a free speech platform) about all this.
The pre-election joint censorship campaign by the media, Big Tech & CIA was always a gigantic story. The CIA spun an outright lie about these docs that helped these platforms censor the docs while *journalists* cheered that.
In light of this new book, it's time to re-visit it.
What's most amazing about all of this is that the NYT/CNN/NBC/HuffPost/Vox axis will spend countless hours objecting to Big Tech censorship before the election in Russia, while they themselves perpetrated the same thing in the US, and will now ignore these new revelations.
Please watch this video from CNN's Wolf Blitzer show shortly before the election. Now that we have (more) proof that the Biden docs were always genuine, just watch how these people lie. If this doesn't make you furious, and you don't despise this part of the media, you're wrong.
That state TV propagandist from CNN explicitly said they *know* that the Hunter Biden docs are "Russian disinformation." He said he *knows.*
How did he know? Because FBI officials told him. You can't get lower or more toxic than these corporate media people.
Look at the campaign video @HuffPost produced for Joe Biden masquerading as a pre-election "news report" that was full of lies: no other way to say it. And their *only* basis was mimicking CIA's claims.
Again, however much you despise these media outlets, it's not enough.
We're working on a definitive video report of how the corporate media, CIA and Big Tech united to lie about the Biden documents before the election and *censor* them from the internet - it will be up tonight - and it's beyond infuriating how purposely and relentlessly they lied.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Yale's "Fascism expert" Jason Stanely -- Yale's "Jacob Urowsky Professor of Philosophy" (does anyone now who that is?) -- explains why he's fleeing the US in fear withYale's Timothy Snyder and his wife Marci Shore -- to Canada, which he calls "the Ukraine of of North America."
He says Canada is Ukraine beacaue it's a bastion of freedom and nobility threatened an by authoritarian neighbor.
The absolute narcissism and melodrama of these people: there are those whose civil liberties are threatened. Celebrated, rich Yale professors are not among them.
Extra gross that Snyder is very wealthy by heralding himself the world's leading warrior against fascism. His book implores others not to "anticipatorily obey" Trump.
2 months into Trump's term, he flees the US as if he's an underground #Resistance leader in occupied France.
If Joe Biden had announced that any private universities that allow criticism of him or Dems shall immediately lose all federal funding -- while keeping the funding if they allow criticisms of Trump -- would that have been constitutional since no school has the right to funding?
How about if Biden cut off all federal funding to universities that deny the validity of the trans identity or the existence of multiple genders -- on the ground that such teaching incites violence against trans people and is hate speech?
Would that have been constitutional?
The only tactic needed to induce support for censorship is train people to believe the views they hate are violence.
Anti-trans activists are inciting violence and calling for genocide, etc.
Opponents of Israel's war on Gaza are calling for genocide and must be censored, etc. etc.
During the Dem primary campaign, one of RFK Jr.'s core issues was free speech and opposing censorship. Then he became known for wanting to combat chronic disease.
So what does he use his first month for? Threatening universities which allow protests against Israel on campus:
Note: you're free to protest the US on campus. You can protest any country or group: just not Israel.
And of course this censorship - like all censorship - is justified the name of stopping hate speech and keeping one group "safe": as if they're being relentlessly attacked.
Every government in the world -- including the most repressive and tyrannical -- "protects free speech" for the views they like.
It's the views they most hate that are targeted. And the most sacred issue for many in the Trump Admin is Israel: that is what's therefore shielded.
There's nothing stopping Germany or the EU from funding war in Ukraine until the end of eternity if they wish, or sending their citizens to Ukraine to fight Russia.
But the German Greens -- the worst of the worst -- are emblematic of European liberals: all posturing, no action.
British pundits prance around as if they're Churchill, and Macron walks around like he's a tough guy, and German Greens and other vague Berlin liberals posture as if they're the paragon of compassion: all while they rely on the US to finance wars, fight and protect them.
Zelensky begged and begged Westerners to get off line and stop tweeting with their blue-yellow emojis and instead go to Ukraine to help them fight the Russian Army, knowing he couldn't win without non-Ukrainians volunteering to fight. Very, very few did.
For a long-time, harsh critiques of US foreign policy and interventionism were found on the populist right. Listen to Pat Buchanan (who worked for Nixon and Reagan) as well as Ron Paul on US policy toward Israel. Very, very few Dems now speak this way:
In February 2021 -- more than a year before Russian troops entered Ukraine en masse -- the inspiring democrat, President Zelensky, banned 3 popular opposition TV networks by accusing them of spreading Russian disinformation.
It'd be as if Biden banned Fox or Trump banned CNN:🇺🇦
In 2014 -- after Victoria Nuland, @ChrisMurphyCT, John McCain etc. used NED to fund protests in Kiev to remove the democratically elected leader and replace him with an unelected pro-US puppet -- Kiev began bombing ethnic Russian civilians in Donbas:
@ChrisMurphyCT It's bizarre to watch history re-written in real time to serve war propaganda: how Azov Battalion was described as neo-Nazi by western elites, only to be turned into heroic warriors the minute we armed them.