I opened my NYTimes app today. They’re trying, but they can’t keep up. News that broke just hours ago is already off the homepage.
THIS IS CRUCIAL
The entire liberal deep state command and control system is broken. Let me explain 🧵
THIS IS CRUCIAL
The entire liberal deep state command and control system is broken. Let me explain 🧵
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1886877482491515246
The NYTimes’ primary function isn’t journalism. It’s narrative coordination—setting the frame so the entire political-media machine knows how to think about an issue before it takes off.
Ever notice how, overnight, everyone starts saying “Biden is sharp as a tack” or “JD Vance is weird”?
It’s not random. It’s a system.
Ever notice how, overnight, everyone starts saying “Biden is sharp as a tack” or “JD Vance is weird”?
It’s not random. It’s a system.
The Narrative Pipeline: How The Blob Operates
The NYTimes, NPR, WaPo, CNN, and the rest don’t just react to news. They function as a distributed, decentralized mission command system for the Democratic Party and the broader Blob.
The NYTimes, NPR, WaPo, CNN, and the rest don’t just react to news. They function as a distributed, decentralized mission command system for the Democratic Party and the broader Blob.
Step 1: Local Bureau Chiefs – These guys are stationed across the country, watching which stories gain traction and fielding calls from Dem operatives feeding them narratives.
Stories that they need to start controlling
Stories that they need to start controlling
Step 2: New York Editors – Bureau chiefs snip the news and send it to NY, where an editor triages it:
•Will this explode nationwide?
•Will it simmer for days?
•Or should we bury it?
•Will this explode nationwide?
•Will it simmer for days?
•Or should we bury it?
Step 3: Editorial Meeting – The most concerning stories get flagged. Here, editors decide on the narrative framing and who to assign to write it.
But before they assign a journalist, they make one critical call—to the Deep State.
Why? To give the government a head start on controlling the story.
At this point, the Deep State doesn’t just say, “Here’s what happened.”
Why? To give the government a head start on controlling the story.
At this point, the Deep State doesn’t just say, “Here’s what happened.”
They strategically select sources based on the tone they want.
•If they need hawkish China rhetoric, they have a “China hardliner” expert on speed dial.
•If they want to downplay a Chinese spy scandal, they go to a “dovish” China expert who will say it’s being blown out of proportion.
•If it’s a military scandal, they pick a “trustworthy” retired general to subtly steer the discussion toward a desired conclusion.
This isn’t journalism—it’s perception warfare.
•If they need hawkish China rhetoric, they have a “China hardliner” expert on speed dial.
•If they want to downplay a Chinese spy scandal, they go to a “dovish” China expert who will say it’s being blown out of proportion.
•If it’s a military scandal, they pick a “trustworthy” retired general to subtly steer the discussion toward a desired conclusion.
This isn’t journalism—it’s perception warfare.
Once the tone is set, the editor assigns the story and suggests the approved sources to call.
The journalist’s job is simple:
•Get quotes from the right experts.
•Write it up.
•Stick to the approved angles
If something goes wrong with the angle (e.g. a source exposes it as a lie) they return to the editor for “guidance”
The journalist’s job is simple:
•Get quotes from the right experts.
•Write it up.
•Stick to the approved angles
If something goes wrong with the angle (e.g. a source exposes it as a lie) they return to the editor for “guidance”
Occasionally, a journalist oversteps. If it’s minor, it passes. If it’s major, the editor kills the piece, buries it on page 16, or reassigns it to a more trusted writer to “correct” the framing.
Overstep too many times and your reassigned to local news or gently (it’s not your fault, we LOVE your spark, just downsizing) let go
Do a really good job sticking to the approved script you’ll get awards or book deals and travel assignments
Nobody flatly says “this award isn’t for toeing the party line” because that would expose the scam
No, these journalist are smart. They either pick up on the reward incentives or they are gently pushed aside.
Overstep too many times and your reassigned to local news or gently (it’s not your fault, we LOVE your spark, just downsizing) let go
Do a really good job sticking to the approved script you’ll get awards or book deals and travel assignments
Nobody flatly says “this award isn’t for toeing the party line” because that would expose the scam
No, these journalist are smart. They either pick up on the reward incentives or they are gently pushed aside.
Suddenly, every news outlet, late-night host, and blue check is reinforcing the same message.
And because they aren’t technically taking orders, they think it’s their own independent analysis.
This is why the narrative feels so unified. No one’s forcing compliance—it’s a system that rewards alignment.
And because they aren’t technically taking orders, they think it’s their own independent analysis.
This is why the narrative feels so unified. No one’s forcing compliance—it’s a system that rewards alignment.
Now each individual pundit and blog is allowed to post independently but they all know unconsciously to work the narrative because that’s where the rewards are.
If someone breaks the narrative in a bug way intentionally there are three options:
1) smear campaign to make them toxic
2) ban them from the system (wikipedia blacklist, social media throttle, no DC party invites, no pentagon press pass, etc)
3) turn them into a double agent who claims to buck the narrative but subtly shifts things left (@bariweiss is the ultimate genius at this)
If someone breaks the narrative in a bug way intentionally there are three options:
1) smear campaign to make them toxic
2) ban them from the system (wikipedia blacklist, social media throttle, no DC party invites, no pentagon press pass, etc)
3) turn them into a double agent who claims to buck the narrative but subtly shifts things left (@bariweiss is the ultimate genius at this)
Not all stories emerge organically. Sometimes, the Deep State calls first.
•A senior editor gets a call:
•“Everyone in DC is talking about how weird JD Vance is.”
•The next morning, at the editorial meeting, that becomes:
•“People are saying JD Vance is weird. Let’s get some stories on that.”
•Then every editor repeats it to their reporters:
•“Did you hear JD Vance is weird? Let’s explore that.”
•A senior editor gets a call:
•“Everyone in DC is talking about how weird JD Vance is.”
•The next morning, at the editorial meeting, that becomes:
•“People are saying JD Vance is weird. Let’s get some stories on that.”
•Then every editor repeats it to their reporters:
•“Did you hear JD Vance is weird? Let’s explore that.”
Suddenly, every news outlet, late-night host, and blue check is reinforcing the same message.
And because they aren’t technically taking orders, they think it’s their own independent analysis.
This is why the narrative feels so unified. No one’s forcing compliance—it’s a system that rewards alignment.
And because they aren’t technically taking orders, they think it’s their own independent analysis.
This is why the narrative feels so unified. No one’s forcing compliance—it’s a system that rewards alignment.
The deep state tries its best to play a soft hand.
They let things emerge around the narrative and only step in if the narrative is evolving in a bad way or new information disturbs the narrative
They let things emerge around the narrative and only step in if the narrative is evolving in a bad way or new information disturbs the narrative
So where does this organic command and control system come from?
Well, the military, of course
Well, the military, of course
Why This Matters: The Mission Command Model
This decentralized coordination mirrors how the best militaries operate—through a doctrine called Mission Command.
This decentralized coordination mirrors how the best militaries operate—through a doctrine called Mission Command.
A bad general micromanages:
•“Move three platoons and six tanks around this road and attack the base.”
A good general gives flexibility:
•“Take this logistics base by X time. Figure out the best way.”
A great general sets intent:
•“We need to cripple their supply lines. Here’s what we know about their logistics.”
The best commanders set objectives, not orders—then let their officers adapt on the ground.
•“Move three platoons and six tanks around this road and attack the base.”
A good general gives flexibility:
•“Take this logistics base by X time. Figure out the best way.”
A great general sets intent:
•“We need to cripple their supply lines. Here’s what we know about their logistics.”
The best commanders set objectives, not orders—then let their officers adapt on the ground.
This is exactly how the NYTimes and the Blob operate.
They don’t give direct orders to every outlet. They set the intent—how the political-media machine should think about an issue.
Then, think tanks, columnists, TV hosts, and activists execute their own variations of the message.
They don’t give direct orders to every outlet. They set the intent—how the political-media machine should think about an issue.
Then, think tanks, columnists, TV hosts, and activists execute their own variations of the message.
Why Republicans Keep Losing the Narrative War
Republicans don’t have this.
•No clear commander’s intent.
•No unified messaging framework.
•No ecosystem where think tanks, media, and party strategists move in the same direction.
Instead, it’s chaotic, reactive, and uncoordinated.
Republicans don’t have this.
•No clear commander’s intent.
•No unified messaging framework.
•No ecosystem where think tanks, media, and party strategists move in the same direction.
Instead, it’s chaotic, reactive, and uncoordinated.
Meanwhile, Democrats operate like a well-oiled Mission Command system—not because of a single top-down controller, but because every key player understands their role in pushing the message.
And until Republicans build a competing system, they’ll always be playing defense.
And until Republicans build a competing system, they’ll always be playing defense.
BUT TRUMP HAS BROKEN THE DEMS MISSION COMMAND SYSTEM
The famed fighter pilot John Boyd (who literally wrote the manual for top gun)
Came up with the OODA LOOP
amzn.to/4jDBVMB
The famed fighter pilot John Boyd (who literally wrote the manual for top gun)
Came up with the OODA LOOP
amzn.to/4jDBVMB
OODA is a process for making better calculated decisions faster
Observe
Orient
Decide
Act
Observe
Orient
Decide
Act
I can’t go into all the details on how the food system works, if you can throw a LOT of information at an enemy
Information of all kinds, including false information
They start to get overloaded
This is what is called THE FOG OF WAR
Information of all kinds, including false information
They start to get overloaded
This is what is called THE FOG OF WAR
Now military have been doing fake attacks and fake information and maneuvering around objectives for centuries but what Boyd found is you can’t just overload the enemy system because your troops will also get overloaded with information
What you have to do is MOVE and adapt l.
Thrown out a ton of information then let your officers change frequently
In the field an officer might bypass the logistics base and go for the train rail but then misinformation causes the enemy to abandon the base so the officer will turn around and destroy it
In a fighter jet you might fly straight so the enemy things you have a problem then when he’s on your tail most people would push the throttle… Boyd said it might be better to drop the flops as a break to make the enemy fly right past you
Be unpredictable !
Thrown out a ton of information then let your officers change frequently
In the field an officer might bypass the logistics base and go for the train rail but then misinformation causes the enemy to abandon the base so the officer will turn around and destroy it
In a fighter jet you might fly straight so the enemy things you have a problem then when he’s on your tail most people would push the throttle… Boyd said it might be better to drop the flops as a break to make the enemy fly right past you
Be unpredictable !
Boyd called this “maneuver warfare” because you’re always maneuvering around the enemy
If you can not only throw out more information, but move a lot faster then your enemy and change tactics on the fly you will “get inside the enemy’s ooda loop” and win easily
If you can not only throw out more information, but move a lot faster then your enemy and change tactics on the fly you will “get inside the enemy’s ooda loop” and win easily
This is exactly what TRUMP is doing
The sheer number of stories is absolutely overloading the New York Times app
New York Times editors do not have time to coordinate with the deep state and coax the process
Trump is completely overloading the information distribution system
The sheer number of stories is absolutely overloading the New York Times app
New York Times editors do not have time to coordinate with the deep state and coax the process
Trump is completely overloading the information distribution system
And he’s not just overloaded the system but he’s moving FAST and adapting tactics
Instance in Panama, he was demanding the canal, but then when he went down, there took a quick win with giving Navy ship’s free transit and kicking China
Then he’s onto Canadian tariffs before the New York Times editors can figure out what the hell happened in Panama
And well before they can develop a narrative for Panama
Instance in Panama, he was demanding the canal, but then when he went down, there took a quick win with giving Navy ship’s free transit and kicking China
Then he’s onto Canadian tariffs before the New York Times editors can figure out what the hell happened in Panama
And well before they can develop a narrative for Panama
Boyd didn’t just teach us how to defeat the enemy—he taught us how to recognize when you’re already winning.
The easiest way to tell? The enemy starts making really dumb moves.
They waste ammo shooting into empty forests, convinced you’re still there—when you actually left two days ago. They fly in a senior general to bark orders, trying to reassert control over a situation already spiraling out of their hands.
Sound familiar?
That’s exactly what the Democrats are doing right now. Chuck Schumer is firing off a constant stream of bombastic orders, desperate to override events he can’t control. The media is fixated on asinine distractions—like the price of eggs—while the real war is being fought elsewhere.
When the enemy is losing, they can’t see the forest for the trees.
Take the aid collapse—a massive exposure of corruption. Instead of grasping the real problem, Democrats have tunnel vision, obsessing over physical access to the building rather than the deeper rot it’s exposing.
And when they’re really losing? They go after the general.
Boyd taught us that when an enemy is out of options, they target the figurehead, hoping to break morale. That’s exactly what’s happening with Elon.
But a great general knows the game. Patton famously commanded a full fake army during D-Day, letting the enemy fixate on him while lower-level officers did the real work.
And that’s where we are now. The Democrats are flailing, distracted, and losing control. Meanwhile, the real fight is happening far below their line of sight.
The easiest way to tell? The enemy starts making really dumb moves.
They waste ammo shooting into empty forests, convinced you’re still there—when you actually left two days ago. They fly in a senior general to bark orders, trying to reassert control over a situation already spiraling out of their hands.
Sound familiar?
That’s exactly what the Democrats are doing right now. Chuck Schumer is firing off a constant stream of bombastic orders, desperate to override events he can’t control. The media is fixated on asinine distractions—like the price of eggs—while the real war is being fought elsewhere.
When the enemy is losing, they can’t see the forest for the trees.
Take the aid collapse—a massive exposure of corruption. Instead of grasping the real problem, Democrats have tunnel vision, obsessing over physical access to the building rather than the deeper rot it’s exposing.
And when they’re really losing? They go after the general.
Boyd taught us that when an enemy is out of options, they target the figurehead, hoping to break morale. That’s exactly what’s happening with Elon.
But a great general knows the game. Patton famously commanded a full fake army during D-Day, letting the enemy fixate on him while lower-level officers did the real work.
And that’s where we are now. The Democrats are flailing, distracted, and losing control. Meanwhile, the real fight is happening far below their line of sight.
In short the sheer number of stories on the NYTimes app right now, no deep clear narrative, tunnel focus on things that don’t matter, and bombastic attempts by generals like Schumer and AOC…. Whole point to one irrefutable fact.
TRUMP IS LITERALLY RUNNING CIRCLES AROUND THEM
TRUMP IS LITERALLY RUNNING CIRCLES AROUND THEM
Did Boyd teach us how to defeat masterful maneuver warfare like the kind Trump is executing now?
YES. But…
1️⃣ Maneuver warfare is insanely hard to stop. In any scenario, it’s designed to keep the enemy off balance.
2️⃣ What looks chaotic is actually a well-planned assault. Trump isn’t just making one move at a time—he’s prepped multiple maneuvers for every possible response. If Democrats attack a specific front, he simply drops one plan and picks up another—fully baked, ready to go.
He’s had years to refine this. The Democrats? They’re starting from scratch.
3️⃣ Maneuver warfare isn’t just about the “four-stars” (Elon, JD, Hegseth) or even the “three-stars” (Cabinet Secretaries). The real game is won by the one-stars and two-stars—the undersecretaries, chiefs of staff, and frontline commanders.
And Democrats? They haven’t even begun to focus on the actual battlefield command center—guys like @michaelgwaltz, a literal Green Beret who spent two decades mastering maneuver warfare.
4️⃣ I’m not about to explain how they can win in a Twitter thread.
If Democrats want a shot, they’ll have to start reading John Boyd themselves.
JK OUT
YES. But…
1️⃣ Maneuver warfare is insanely hard to stop. In any scenario, it’s designed to keep the enemy off balance.
2️⃣ What looks chaotic is actually a well-planned assault. Trump isn’t just making one move at a time—he’s prepped multiple maneuvers for every possible response. If Democrats attack a specific front, he simply drops one plan and picks up another—fully baked, ready to go.
He’s had years to refine this. The Democrats? They’re starting from scratch.
3️⃣ Maneuver warfare isn’t just about the “four-stars” (Elon, JD, Hegseth) or even the “three-stars” (Cabinet Secretaries). The real game is won by the one-stars and two-stars—the undersecretaries, chiefs of staff, and frontline commanders.
And Democrats? They haven’t even begun to focus on the actual battlefield command center—guys like @michaelgwaltz, a literal Green Beret who spent two decades mastering maneuver warfare.
4️⃣ I’m not about to explain how they can win in a Twitter thread.
If Democrats want a shot, they’ll have to start reading John Boyd themselves.
JK OUT
Wow!
A RT from Elon—honored, sir! 🫡 Now, let’s crush MSM. How?
BONUS 1/4 - Independent Media John Boyd Style
A RT from Elon—honored, sir! 🫡 Now, let’s crush MSM. How?
BONUS 1/4 - Independent Media John Boyd Style
Bonus 2/4
I learned the NYTimes tricks because I run the small narrowly focused independent maritime news site @gCaptain
Boyd taught us that small, distributed, and specialized units dominate maneuver warfare. Independent news in general is excellent. People like @charliekirk11, @JackPosobiec & @ShawnRyan762 are crucial, but their scope is wide.
We also need specialists who think independently from editors.
We want independent journalists who own their niche. My own publication gCaptain focuses only on shipping & naval ops. @mercoglianos does the same on Youtube.
Drilling down you have @MikeSchuler focused just on ships while people like @cdrsalamander focus just on navies. Or even more specialized @maphumanintent on tariffs and trade.
Big outlets can do this too—@BreitbartNews is solidly right with editorial commander’s intent BUT their military editor, @kristina_wong, is sharp, independent, and excellent at her craft.
Support the specialists. That’s how we win.
I learned the NYTimes tricks because I run the small narrowly focused independent maritime news site @gCaptain
Boyd taught us that small, distributed, and specialized units dominate maneuver warfare. Independent news in general is excellent. People like @charliekirk11, @JackPosobiec & @ShawnRyan762 are crucial, but their scope is wide.
We also need specialists who think independently from editors.
We want independent journalists who own their niche. My own publication gCaptain focuses only on shipping & naval ops. @mercoglianos does the same on Youtube.
Drilling down you have @MikeSchuler focused just on ships while people like @cdrsalamander focus just on navies. Or even more specialized @maphumanintent on tariffs and trade.
Big outlets can do this too—@BreitbartNews is solidly right with editorial commander’s intent BUT their military editor, @kristina_wong, is sharp, independent, and excellent at her craft.
Support the specialists. That’s how we win.
Bonus 3/4:
@MikeBenzCyber is the perfect case study in why specialization wins. His focus? Internet censorship—not humanitarian aid. Yet he was the one who exposed USAID corruption because it intersected with his niche. That revelation triggered a chain reaction, pushing other independent journalists to dig deeper.
The New York Times has leaned liberal my entire life, but it was still a great news organization—until it abandoned specialists for generalists in the early 2000s.
In my field—shipping—they used to have dedicated dock reporters who lived and breathed maritime news. Now? Nothing. And it shows.
The BIG difference between specialist and generalist journalists? Sources.
Specialists build deep, trusted networks. Generalists rely on the same recycled “blob” sources and editorial databases—so they never break real news.
Look at me. I’m a ship captain. @gCaptain doesn’t write about media or politics. But watching the NYT bungle maritime stories for years—especially their terrible naval shipbuilding coverage—led me to investigate their process… and eventually write this thread.
@MikeBenzCyber is the perfect case study in why specialization wins. His focus? Internet censorship—not humanitarian aid. Yet he was the one who exposed USAID corruption because it intersected with his niche. That revelation triggered a chain reaction, pushing other independent journalists to dig deeper.
The New York Times has leaned liberal my entire life, but it was still a great news organization—until it abandoned specialists for generalists in the early 2000s.
In my field—shipping—they used to have dedicated dock reporters who lived and breathed maritime news. Now? Nothing. And it shows.
The BIG difference between specialist and generalist journalists? Sources.
Specialists build deep, trusted networks. Generalists rely on the same recycled “blob” sources and editorial databases—so they never break real news.
Look at me. I’m a ship captain. @gCaptain doesn’t write about media or politics. But watching the NYT bungle maritime stories for years—especially their terrible naval shipbuilding coverage—led me to investigate their process… and eventually write this thread.
Bonus 4/4 - The Blob’s War on Independent Media
But there is a big problem with specialized media: the Blob can’t control it. It also can’t outright delete it. So what does it do? Throttle.
For conservative news specialists, that means smear campaigns. Look at @JackPosobiec—accused of being a Russian agent. This man is a U.S. Navy intelligence officer. Ridiculous. But once you’re on a blacklist, Google and others use it to throttle search results.
But what about conservative specialists without a news platform? They’re harder to attack—so the New York Times just buries them in allegations. Look at @MikeBenzCyber. NYT writes hit pieces, and because their articles dominate Google snippets. Social media sites pull in these snippets snd throttle him
And it’s not just conservatives who get nailed. The Blob throttles anyone it can’t control. @gCaptain is bipartisan—we have more liberal journalists than conservatives like me—yet Wikipedia straight-up deleted my personal page for being “irrelevant” and blacklisted gCaptain for “spamming” (we added facts to Wikipedia maritime articles).
Why does this matter? Because Google can’t keep its own public blacklist (or they’d get sued). But they can use Wikipedia’s blacklist to:
•Throttle our search rankings
•Deny our journalists Twitter Blue checks
•Kill our Facebook reach
gCaptain built 250,000 Facebook subs—then Meta stopped distributing our articles after Wikipedia blacklisted us.
And we’re just one example.
The Blob hates independent media because it can’t control us. It wants newsrooms run by Blob-approved editorial teams. If you have them, you get boosted by academia, think tanks, and Google’s algorithm.
If you don’t? You get blacklisted. Or graylisted. And you get throttled into irrelevance.
But there is a big problem with specialized media: the Blob can’t control it. It also can’t outright delete it. So what does it do? Throttle.
For conservative news specialists, that means smear campaigns. Look at @JackPosobiec—accused of being a Russian agent. This man is a U.S. Navy intelligence officer. Ridiculous. But once you’re on a blacklist, Google and others use it to throttle search results.
But what about conservative specialists without a news platform? They’re harder to attack—so the New York Times just buries them in allegations. Look at @MikeBenzCyber. NYT writes hit pieces, and because their articles dominate Google snippets. Social media sites pull in these snippets snd throttle him
And it’s not just conservatives who get nailed. The Blob throttles anyone it can’t control. @gCaptain is bipartisan—we have more liberal journalists than conservatives like me—yet Wikipedia straight-up deleted my personal page for being “irrelevant” and blacklisted gCaptain for “spamming” (we added facts to Wikipedia maritime articles).
Why does this matter? Because Google can’t keep its own public blacklist (or they’d get sued). But they can use Wikipedia’s blacklist to:
•Throttle our search rankings
•Deny our journalists Twitter Blue checks
•Kill our Facebook reach
gCaptain built 250,000 Facebook subs—then Meta stopped distributing our articles after Wikipedia blacklisted us.
And we’re just one example.
The Blob hates independent media because it can’t control us. It wants newsrooms run by Blob-approved editorial teams. If you have them, you get boosted by academia, think tanks, and Google’s algorithm.
If you don’t? You get blacklisted. Or graylisted. And you get throttled into irrelevance.
Finally—thank goodness for X!
Elon literally saved deep-niche independent journalism by nuking the blue checkmark scam.
Before? We couldn’t get verified by Twitter because Wikipedia blacklisted us. Now? X cut the umbilical cord to the deep state, and independent voices are finally breaking through.
THIS is why X is now packed with incredible threads from top-tier deep niche experts—everyone from esoteric specialists like @gas_biz guy to once-throttled national security journalists like @LeeSmithDC. Heck, you can even get direct insights on the Deep State from former Trump NSC directors like @EzraACohen & @JoshuaSteinman.
Bottom line: You wouldn’t be reading this thread without X.
Thank you, @elonmusk!
Elon literally saved deep-niche independent journalism by nuking the blue checkmark scam.
Before? We couldn’t get verified by Twitter because Wikipedia blacklisted us. Now? X cut the umbilical cord to the deep state, and independent voices are finally breaking through.
THIS is why X is now packed with incredible threads from top-tier deep niche experts—everyone from esoteric specialists like @gas_biz guy to once-throttled national security journalists like @LeeSmithDC. Heck, you can even get direct insights on the Deep State from former Trump NSC directors like @EzraACohen & @JoshuaSteinman.
Bottom line: You wouldn’t be reading this thread without X.
Thank you, @elonmusk!
@gCaptain @MikeBenzCyber UPDATE: Looks like the NYT called in their top hitman, @ezraklein, to rush out a video countering this narrative.
Right on cue. 🤦♂️👇
Right on cue. 🤦♂️👇
https://twitter.com/johnkonrad/status/1887257949128606163
@supertrucker It’s also the same reason my line can take a hiatus from his businesses for six months to focus on politics
He has great teams all his companies, and only has to check in and provide command intent when something goes off the rails
He has great teams all his companies, and only has to check in and provide command intent when something goes off the rails
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
