Tag: hypocrisy

The EU Insists Its X Fine Isn’t About Censorship. Here’s Why It Is.

When the European Commission fined X €120 million on December 5, officials could not have been clearer. This, they said, was not about censorship. It was just about “transparency.”

They repeat it so often you start to wonder why.

The fine marks the first major enforcement of the Digital Services Act, Europe’s new censorship-driven internet rulebook.

It was sold as a consumer protection measure, designed to make online platforms safer and more accountable, and included a whole list of censorship requirements, fining platforms that don’t comply.

The first target is Elon Musk’s X, and the list of alleged violations look less like user safety concerns and more like a blueprint for controlling who gets heard, who gets trusted, and who gets to talk back.

The Commission charged X with three violations: the paid blue checkmark system, the lack of advertising data, and restricted data access for researchers.

None of these touches direct content censorship. But all of them shape visibility, credibility, and surveillance, just in more polite language.

Musk’s decision to turn blue checks into a subscription feature ended the old system where establishment figures, journalists, politicians, and legacy celebrities got verification.

The EU called Musk’s decision “deceptive design.” The old version, apparently, was honesty itself. Before, a blue badge meant you were important. After, it meant you paid. Brussels prefers the former, where approved institutions get algorithmic priority, and the rest of the population stays in the queue.

The new system threatened that hierarchy. Now, anyone could buy verification, diluting the aura of authority once reserved for anointed voices.

However, that’s not the full story. Under the old Twitter system, verification was sold as a public service, but in reality it worked more like a back-room favor and a status purchase.

The main application process was shut down in 2010, so unless you were already famous, the only way to get a blue check was to spend enough money on advertising or to be important enough to trigger impersonation problems.

Ad Age reported that advertisers who spent at least fifteen thousand dollars over three months could get verified, and Twitter sales reps told clients the same thing. That meant verification was effectively a perk reserved for major media brands, public figures, and anyone willing to pay. It was a symbol of influence rationed through informal criteria and private deals, creating a hierarchy shaped by cronyism rather than transparency.

Keep reading

Beyond the Pale: Ilhan Omar Says Somalis Are the Actual Victims of the Massive Somali Fraud Scandal

Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar tried to play the victim when questioned Sunday about the massive fraud perpetrated by those of Somali descent in her state and district, but her argument rings hollow.

CBS News “Face the Nation” host Margaret Brennan introduced the subject, noting that the Justice Department uncovered and prosecuted more than $1 billion in fraudulent payments, mostly going to those from the Somali community in Minnesota.

“Of the 87 people charged, all but eight are of Somali descent, and that has added to the spotlight being put specifically on your community,” Brennan said.

“Why do you think this fraud was allowed to get so widespread?” the host asked.

“I want to say, you know, this also has an impact on Somalis, because we are also taxpayers in Minnesota,” Omar replied.

“We also could have benefited from the program and the money that was stolen. And so it’s been really frustrating for people to not acknowledge the fact that we’re also — as Minnesotans, as taxpayers — really upset and angry about the fraud that has occurred,” she said.

Keep reading

The REAL Racism the Lefties Won’t Talk About

Race hustling weasels such as Al Sharpton have long suggested that white people don’t want to have a talk about race, because we crayolas are all racist and whatnot. Good news, Al, I’m ready for that talk now!

The globalists — and their hate-spewing myrmidons, such as Sharpton, Joy Reid, and Joe Biden, have spent decades convincing YT people of two things:

  • That there is nothing worse than racism;
  • Leftists will decide who and what is “racist.”

Let’s start with “racist” voter ID!

White progressives will trip over their rainbow clogs to prove how “so not racist” they are by explaining why black people can’t maintain an ID like everyone else, with tragic excuses including: black folks may not be able to find that wifi IF they can even afford it, or they can’t find their way to the Department of Motor Vehicles, all of which I find pretty racist.

Keep reading

Is President Trump really so concerned about the flow of drugs ‘poisoning Americans,’ when he just pardoned a notorious drug trafficker and warp speeds harmful pharmaceuticals?

Anyone who still believes the Trump administration’s newly scheduled wars in Latin America are in any way related to stopping drugs from killing Americans is not paying attention to the full spectrum of policies coming out of this administration.

Instead of listening to Trump’s many bombastic public statements in a vacuum, let’s examine the record of his actions.

This administration has an obsession with drugs. Even known harmful drugs have been embraced and promoted by President Trump in his first and second terms.

There is now plenty of evidence that Trump’s Operation Warp Speed project, which he placed under the direction of former pharma executive General Gustav Perna and the U.S. military, led to mega-deaths in the United States and the world. Speed came at the cost of any valid clinical trials, with needles entering arms under Emergency Use Authorization with only two months of safety data on the FDA’s books. When it comes to experimental new medicines or treatments, you don’t gamble with people’s lives. There are reasons why it takes 10-15 years to get a vaccine through the approval process, but Trump was willing to make that gamble. And it paid off in the form of record profits for Pfizer and Moderna.

The latest evidence of that was just last week when Trump’s own FDA finally fessed up and told us the Covid shots led to the deaths of at least 10 children during trials (this is based on VAERS data which has been proven to be underreported by a factor of at least 10). This was kept hidden from the American public, along with all the other reams of evidence showing that the shots killed people of all ages and continues to do so.

As a result, hundreds of thousands of Americans report suffering vaccine injuries, as even The New York Times is reporting.

Keep reading

Trump’s Pardon of Convicted Drug Trafficker and Former President of Honduras Undermines His Own Reasoning for War on Venezuela

Trump’s recent pardon of convicted drug trafficker and former President of Honduras undermines his own reasoning for the escalation with Venezuela.

President Trump has stated previously that the justification for the escalation in tensions with President Maduro and Venezuela is a hard stance against drug trafficking into the U.S. from Latin American countries. If this was the case, then the recent pardon of former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández – a man convicted of working with drug traffickers to smuggle drugs into the U.S. – directly undercuts his own reasoning.

Convicted in February of 2024, former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández was sentenced to 45 years in a United States federal prison. During the 57-year-old’s two terms in office, he allowed over 400 tons of cocaine to flow through Honduras and into the United States in exchange for millions of dollars from cartel drug lords like Joaquín Guzmán, AKA “El Chapo.”

According to the Associated Press, Hernández was even caught on video boasting to drug traffickers during his trial that “together they were going to shove the drugs right up the noses of the gringos.” Trump’s justification for pardoning Hernández is that people he respects told him Hernández was “treated very harshly and unfairly.”

The problem is that pardoning a man who helped turn his country into a narco-state – while taking bribes from convicted cartel bosses – undermines the exact reasoning Trump and the United States have used to escalate pressure on Venezuela. Tensions first began in 2017 when the U.S. sanctioned Venezuelan Vice President Tareck El Aissami for drug-trafficking activity. Fast forward to 2019, and the Trump administration formally indicted President Nicolás Maduro and senior Venezuelan officials on narco-terrorism charges, arguing that they were responsible for trafficking cocaine into the United States.

These actions were presented as necessary steps to confront foreign leaders who enable cartels, threaten regional stability, and push drugs into American communities. The message from the Trump administration was simple: the U.S. will not tolerate narco-traffickers.

This is exactly why the pardon of Hernández undercuts Trump’s own argument. You cannot escalate against Venezuela because of its alleged operation of a criminal enterprise, then turn around and pardon a man who was proven – through evidence, witnesses, and beyond a reasonable doubt in a U.S. court of law – to have done the very same thing. In Hernández’s case, he did it while presenting himself as a U.S. ally to the public, all while taking cartel money behind the scenes.

Keep reading

Influencer X accounts try to defend their US patriotism, despite having never set foot in the country

Last week social media platform X revealed the national origins of all its user accounts – divulging many top political voices on hot-button US issues are actually keyboard warriors based in Africa and Asia.

For many, such as fake Native American grievance accounts run from Bangladesh and Nigerians posing as Trump-loving Midwestern moms, their motivation is simple – trying to make money (usually from selling T-shirts).

For others it’s more complicated, such as Ian Miles Cheong, a Malaysian-born, Dubai-based writer and X celebrity with 1.2 million followers.

He’s built his brand on acerbic social criticism and championing the new right in US politics, but says it was all on his followers for assuming he was actually in the country.

The idea that you can’t have a say on anything regarding America just because you don’t live there is kind of silly because what happens in America happens everywhere else,” Cheong, 40, told The Post.

“On top of that, practically every country has a US military base at this point. It’s an empire, like it or not, and people are going to have opinions.”

Cheong became the target of attacks once it was revealed he is actually in Dubai.

“You’ve never set foot in America and yet you spend every day trying to influence our culture and politics. You talk about our country exclusively and never say a word about your own.

“If you don’t see why that might rub Americans the wrong way, I don’t know what to tell you,” one prominent American podcaster wrote to him.

Keep reading

The Same Democrats Who Said NOTHING When Obama Drone-Bombed 16-yr-Old US Citizen Al-Awlaki Are Furious About Trump Bombing Dangerous Venezuelan Cartel Members in a Boat

Al-Qaeda leader and US citizen Anwar al-Awlaki was killed in Yemen in September 2011 in a targeted strike.
Al-Awlaki was born in New Mexico and attended college in Colorado.

Obama dropped a bomb on his head.

In May 2012 The New York Times revealed that Barack Obama was the official who actually made the final call on US drone strikes.

Seven months before the New York Times report, Abdulrahman Anwar al-Awlaki, a 16-year-old American citizen from Denver, was killed in a drone strike in Yemen in October 2011.

Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi was the son of terrorist Anwar al-Aulaqi. He did not have a trial.  He was sixteen.

Barack Obama dropped a bomb on his head.

In January 2020, the United States killed General Qassim Soleimani, a top commander of Iran’s al-Quds Force, in an airstrike at Baghdad’s International Airport. The strike also killed Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of Iran-backed militias known as the Popular Mobilization Forces. Seven people were reportedly killed in the airstrike.

Soleimani was responsible for the deaths of dozens of US military men and women in Iraq.

Speaker Pelosi, Democrats and the fake news media were outraged over the death of the world’s number one terrorist.

The media and Democrats hammered President Trump all day.

Keep reading

Trump pardons convicted narco-trafficking pol amid plot to rig Honduran election

Donald Trump is threatening to destroy the Honduran economy unless the country elects the oligarch-run National Party. Now, he’s even pardoned the last party member to rule the country, who was convicted in 2024 of smuggling hundreds of tons of drugs into the US.

On November 28, US President Donald Trump Trump declared he will be pardoning former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, who was sentenced to 45 years in a New York prison in 2024 for his role in helping smuggle 400 tons of cocaine into the US in a drug-running scheme linked to the Sinaloa cartel. Hernandez, Trump wrote, had been “treated very harshly and unfairly.”

While Hernandez was President of Honduras, he initiated contracts worth over half a million dollars with Republican lobbying firm BGR Group, after his brother, Tony, was sentenced to life in prison for cocaine smuggling. In the time since, BGR has donated tens of thousands of dollars to the campaign of Marco Rubio, the Cuban American former senator who now serves as Trump’s Secretary of State.

As The Grayzone reported, the US Department of Justice indictment of Hernandez contained explicit and often shocking details of his role in transforming his country into the Western hemisphere’s premier narco-state. The US-backed president “wielded incredible influence and partnered with some of the most notorious narcotics traffickers in Honduras, allowing them to flourish under their control,” a DOJ prosecutor stated.

Keep reading

Trump Slammed Biden’s $52 Billion CHIPS Act. Then He Used It To Buy a Federal Stake in Intel.

In March, President Donald Trump blasted the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) and Science Act of 2022. He called it “a horrible, horrible thing.” Passed under President Joe Biden, the CHIPS Act was essentially a $52 billion industrial policy slush fund intended primarily to bolster domestic production of computer chips.

When the law passed in 2022, the Biden administration said it was a “smart investment” that would “strengthen American manufacturing, supply chains, and national security, and invest in research and development, science and technology” while bringing thousands of “good-paying manufacturing jobs back home.”

There was never much reason to believe in the previous administration’s industrial policy boosterism. Early grants largely went either to factories that were already in development and would have been built anyway or to facilities of questionable economic value that might not be completed even with the additional taxpayer funding.

So Trump was on solid ground when he told Congress, “You should get rid of the CHIPS Act, and whatever’s left over…you should use it to reduce debt, or any other reason you want to.” Yet in the months since, Trump has made use of CHIPS funding not to reduce the debt, but to pursue his own questionable industrial policy. His version is even less accountable and may well be even worse for taxpayers.

Among the recipients of CHIPS funding was computer chipmaker Intel, which was set to receive $11 billion to help fund the construction of semiconductor fabs in several states. By late summer, the company said it had already received more than $5 billion of the funds. But Intel struggled to fulfill those commitments, falling behind on factory construction in some places and laying off workers as it suffered from ongoing financial and managerial problems. By the middle of 2025, Intel looked very much like a failing business.

In theory, the CHIPS Act provided a mechanism for the federal government to retract the grant and get all or part of its money back should Intel fail to meet its obligations. It’s not clear whether the federal government would have exercised its option to take the money back, but it was an option—until Trump stepped in.

As the company flailed, Trump met with its CEO, Lip-Bu Tan. Trump first called for him to resign. Then in August, the Trump administration announced that the federal government would just take partial ownership of Intel. Essentially, the U.S. government would purchase a roughly 10 percent stake in the chipmaker, partially nationalizing the company. And funds from CHIPS would be used to do it.

Trump bragged about the deal, saying he planned to “do more of them.” The company’s stock price rose on the news, suggesting that investors liked it. But that’s probably because it was a good deal for the company, at taxpayer expense.

According to public financial filings, the federal government would disburse the remaining funds, about $6 billion, while clearing any obligations for the company to actually complete work on new domestic semiconductor fabs.

In exchange, the federal government would gain partial ownership—as well as all the financial risks stockholders usually have when they invest in companies. Those risks will now be borne by taxpayers. As Carnegie Endowment fellow Peter Harrell pointed out in a social media post, the move came with “a lot of downside risk.”

Fundamentally, Trump gave Intel a federal bailout, removing the company’s public obligations and accountability while loading more financial risk onto the public.

Keep reading

Chicago Mayor Claims Crime Fell “Because of Him” as Texas National Guard Prepares to Leave

Chicago’s crime crisis did not disappear overnight, but you wouldn’t know that from listening to Chicago’s Democrat mayor.

This week, Mayor Brandon Johnson stood at a press conference and claimed that crime fell “because of him,” while attacking the Texas National Guard and President Trump for “wasting taxpayer dollars.”

The performance would have been comical if the stakes were not so serious.

Just hours before the event, at 11:00 p.m., an unknown individual attempted to start a fire outside City Hall.

Security footage shows the suspect lighting the exterior of the building before fleeing.

A CPD officer put out the flames before they spread. Instead of focusing on the conditions that allow attempted arson outside the city’s central government building, the mayor pivoted to politics.

He called the National Guard withdrawal an “unconditional surrender by the Trump administration,” as if the presence of Texas troops—not Chicago’s own governance—were the reason the city remains unsafe.

According to the mayor, Guard troops “sat idle for six weeks doing nothing,” a claim that conveniently ignores why Texas deployed them in the first place: to support overwhelmed border states and help cities impacted by the migrant influx created by Democrat sanctuary policies.

Chicago asked for migrants, boasted about being a sanctuary city, and then attacked Texas when the consequences arrived.

The mayor also complained that these deployments cost “hundreds of millions of dollars,” even though his own administration spends billions on bureaucracy and programs that have failed to reduce violence.

He criticized federal spending on Argentina while ignoring the billions Chicago spends without improving basic services.

Meanwhile, the attempted arson outside City Hall demonstrates exactly why a heightened security presence has been necessary.

He then targeted CPB official Greg Bovino, whom he claimed “left a trail of tears” and “undermined” the city’s work, even though federal officers arrived in September, and yet the mayor took credit for crime reductions from the summer months.

His argument was so weak that he joked Trump must think “September counts as a summer month.”

What he did not explain is how a city with increasing violence, collapsing public schools, and overflowing migrant shelters can possibly credit its problems to Texas or Trump.

The mayor framed the withdrawal as a victory against “unconstitutional federal overreach” and claimed Trump is waging a “war on poor and working people.”

But under Democrat leadership, Chicago remains one of the most dangerous cities in America, with residents fleeing, businesses closing, and families begging for basic safety.

Keep reading