Consistent with their handling of Djokovic situation, Australian officials apparently failed to realize that there would be more interest than usual in this court hearing and therefore failed to ensure the live stream worked, meaning the hearing is taking place in secret.👍
The stream now seems to be working for those interested in watching the hearing on Djokovic's legal challenge to Australia's refusal to allow him into their country due to his unvaccinated status:
The hearing is still early and it's always difficult to know for sure, but the judge certainly seems quite receptive and even supportive of the arguments of Djokovic's lawyers thus far for why the revocation of his visa and denial of entrance by Australian officials was unlawful.
Pretty much every comment the judge has made in this hearing so far has been a pro-Djokovic argument (or criticism of Australian officials), culminating thus far in what sounds more like a rousing closing argument on behalf of Djokovic:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Hate @tedcruz all you want but these questions about FBI's role in 1/6 are vital: because it's what FBI did in the 1st War on Terror and with the Whitmer case, but also because there's ample evidence they did it here. The media's indifference is shameful:
From the start, there has been ample reason to believe FBI's involvement in 1/6 was significant. But there's been no pressure to find out because most of the corporate media -- subservient as always to the Security State -- rendered the topic off-limits:
I apologize to the large number of liberals and some of their left allies for impugning the integrity of FBI and suggesting that they may not have been entirely forthcoming about their role in 1/6, and for believing this should be investigated. I know how much anger it produces.
Wanting the state to silence one's adversaries is pervasive across time and culture -- that's why the 1st Am banned it -- but until recently, people were embarrassed to explicitly advocate it.
But in US liberal culture, censorship is now so normalized that this is no longer odd:
That's all independent of the legal inanities in Apatow's demand as it pertains to the FCC's powers and the like. That's just standard ignorance.
Most notable is how common it is among Dems to crave a union of state and corporate power brute censor one's political adversaries.
Again: it is bizarre -- surreal -- that the people who have convinced themselves they are fighting fascism in the US vehemently demand a union of state and corporate power to silence their enemies.
A fanatic, by definition, believes all their tactics are inherently just.
That 2 of the US's largest social media giants actively censored reporting about the Biden family based on genuine documents 3 weeks before the election is one of the most alarming cases in years, but most media outlets *supported* the censorship because it helped Biden. If not:
But the most overlooked component of this scandal the media role. They all enabled this censorship by spreading and ratifying the outright lie from CIA and other intel officials that these docs were "Russian disinformation."
Once that was disproven, they never acknowledged it.
To this day, you can go to most major outlets -- NBC News, NYT, CNN, Atlantic, almost all of them -- and find the CIA lie that the Biden docs were Russian disinformation. Even once a book by a POLITICO reporter proved they were real, those outlets ignored that and left that lie.
Really enjoyed this 20-minute discussion with @krystalball and @esaagar on the one-year anniversary of 1/6 and how it is exploited and for what purposes.
Platforms that allow in-depth discussion, reach large audiences and remain independent are crucial.
(By the way: since Breaking Points is a program on which I often appear, and frequently appeared on their prior program, is it safe and fair to assume that I share all of the ideological views of its hosts and am responsible for all their pronouncements whether I'm there or not?)
Speaking of platforms enabling very large audiences to be reached while remaining independent: the views for our Rumble video reports, after just 3 months, are very high and rapidly growing. It's true of Rumble as a whole, hence the wave of media attacks on it as it grows more.
The CIA
The FBI
Big Tech Censorship
David Frum
Bill Kristol
Liz Cheney
Bush/Cheney spokesperson Nicolle Wallace
Neocons generally (Max Boot & Jen Rubin)
The Lincoln Project Scumbags
DOJ Prosecutors
NSA operatives