There are so many relevant facts that run counter to the mandated narrative for which no space exists now. But it's always the same cycle with wars: it takes weeks, usually months, sometimes years for the mob inebriation to wear off, and only then does sobriety and regret emerge.
It's not as if people are suddenly inventing or dredging up these claims about Zelensky's massive wealth being laundered and hidden throughout the west through his ties to the Ukrainian oligarch funding Azov. Read this, from 2021 on the Pandora Papers:
Just last year, even **the Atlantic Council** was warning about Zelensky's deeply disturbing and seemingly corrupt dependence on this Ukrainian oligarch, under sanctions in the west, and the favors and silencing of dissent done on his behalf:
The US/NATO are flooding this country with very dangerous weapons. It's clear they intend to arm an insurgency for years to keep Russia bogged down. Some journalists have decided their role is activism for Ukraine, but journalism must highlight the risks from this, including Azov
One of the most beloved and influential accounts about the war has been @IAPonomarenko of the "The Kyiv Independent." 40k followers on Feb. 21, now almost 1m. He has ties with Azov, a neo-Nazi group. Maybe you care, maybe not. But journalism should include facts, not boosterism.
All of his utterances go viral as unquestioned fact, often included in major western media outlets, no matter how bereft of evidence they are. Again, maybe you don't care. You like what he says, don't want to know. But journalism isn't about pleasing.
In every war that interests the US, any dissenters of any kind are automatically branded by its corporate media as traitors, on the side of the Enemy, sympathizing with the Evildoers. A WashPost column today maligns a large number of media figures this way. Here's Peter Hitchens:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Beyond that, the letter itself that they fed to their puppet Bertrand (now promoted to CNN as a reward for her service) explicitly referenced claims in the last part of the letter that the materials on the laptop were "Russian disinformation": exactly what Brennan denies.
Indeed, this pre-election lie from CIA goons had only purpose: to protect Biden by deceiving key institutions to believe the materials were unreliable because they were "Russian disinformation."
That's how people like Jen Psaki promoted it, and it's why Big Tech censored it.
The only thing more stunning than watching the US Government forcibly close a speech, information and community social media platform that 170 million of its citizens voluntarily chose to use is seeing that it's Trump, almost alone in DC, fighting to keep it open:
If you think that TikTok was banned was due to fears of China, then you haven't been paying attention. That was the original impetus for it (including under Trump), but everyone involved says the reason it got enough votes was fear of Israel criticism:
A Globo e autoridades brasileiras alegaram que a descrição de Zuckerberg das ordens "secretas" de censura do Brasil eram "sem provas".
Isso é desinformação. Há provas esmagadoras para isso. Em abril, a @Folha publicou um Editorial condenando a censura de Moraes e seu sigilo:
Enquanto a Globo defendeu repetidamente Moraes e suas ordens secretas de censura — da mesma forma que defendeu tudo o que Sergio Moro fez — a Folha, em 2024, condenou repetidamente o esquema de Moraes como perigoso, antidemocrático e inconstitucional:
Left-liberal Twitch streamers and YouTube shows knew that to attract a pre-election audience (money), they had to tell their viewers Kamala was *clearly* winning.
So they randomly anointed a random Twitter user, @Ettingermentumv, into a data guru, who assured them all of it.
For months -- including just a couple weeks before the election -- this fraudulent partisan data guru kept saying the polls were wrong, the polling experts were wrong, the secret numbers he saw made clear that Kamala wasn't just ahead but ahead by a good distance.
This is as much a problem with partisan independent media as partisan corporate shows: they have to validate their viewers' desire to believe things even if untrue.
So after all the profit and Substack subscriptions were sold by this fraud, he wrote his "I-was-wrong" confession:
The belief that Joe Rogan and those like him are just an updated Fox News -- a non-stop messaging of right-wing ideology -- is beyond stupid.
Those podcasts grew organically: in part because they're not ideological or partisan. They're normal conversations: how humans speak.
Depicting Rogan as a far-right ideologue is something only those who never heard his show would say. AOC separated from Bernie's campaign after Bernie touted Rogan's endorsement.
He is a vehement defender of same-sex marriage. He believes in full freedom for adults' personal lives. He frequently argues that corporate power is suffocating the lives of ordinary people, etc. etc.