981 Comments

Stay safe Matt. You might be in danger from these psychopaths.

Expand full comment

For sure. Please don’t get Arkancided and wake up with multiple self-inflicted gunshot wounds to the back of the head. And most definitely stay away from nailguns….

Expand full comment

"Arkancided "

Ok, that was funny. Never heard it put that way before.

Expand full comment

Haha, yeah….it’s just a crazy old “conspiracy theory” with a 50+ body count attributed to it. I’m sure there’s absolutely nothing tied to that famous first family from Arkansas. Pure coincidence. (Legal Disclaimer: This is satire and in no way to be construed as truth, fact or I’ll intentioned. *brought to you by Pfizer*).

Expand full comment

Yeah, the only job more dangerous than working for that family is Junior Security Officer on one of Capt Kirk's away teams....

Expand full comment

Was just thinking about Epstein donee Stacy Plackett.

Expand full comment

Like that dude that just went up against the Clintons......found with a shot to the chest, no gun in sight, hung from a tree, but yeah, it was a "suicide."

The bankers were killing off people during the Great Financial Crime Spree too. There was one title dude who was suicided by nine shots from a nail gun. But, of course, he did that all by himself.

Expand full comment

Did all of you guys just turn commentary about Matt's thoughts on civil liberties into a Vince Foster dystopia? Really?

Expand full comment

One of the perennial charms of the Racket News threads. Taibbi closes his piece mentioning that among other things he was accused by the subcommittee of promoting conspiracy theories...and then the loyal commenters get down to business...

Expand full comment

When the police came to the White House after finding Vince Foster’s body, the Clinton people were desperately carting files out of his office. Which suggests that they had no advance warning.

It’s also worth noting that Juanita Broaddrick, who accused Bill Clinton of rape, is still alive, four decades later.

Why kill someone when the media are ready to bury them for you?

Expand full comment

I’ve heard it for years but I have a well worn tinfoil hat. Pray for Matt, it’s a war of good vs evil. I’ve experienced supernatural protection in times of trouble, it’s real.

Expand full comment

Prayer work's. Truth is light.

Expand full comment

Prayer is very real for me. Had many miracles in my life the last few years.

Expand full comment

Two words: Mark MIddleton. Look it up.

Expand full comment

'Arkancided'?

Expand full comment

Refers to the statistically improbable number of Clinton associates who’ve died under mysterious circumstances.

Expand full comment

Jeez, Matt sure deserves better readers.

Expand full comment

It’s a common term, I thought. I pray often for the truth tellers and their protection.

Expand full comment

I don't think he's talking about you when he says Matt deserves better readers.

Expand full comment

Because people like the Clintons would never murder someone right?

Gaddafi, captured by her drones, beaten, then sodomised with a knife, then tortured to death, would disagree, but he can't because Hillary had him killed. And then laughed and laughed about it.

Your mere skepticism is meaningless.

Expand full comment

Billary said, "We came, we saw, he died."

Then I think her leaked emails set the record straight when it changed that to, "We came, we saw, I needed someone to murder so I could prove my presidential bona fides, he died."

Admittedly not as catchy as the edited version.

Expand full comment

They’re ruthless. How many people died mysteriously in the hotel just before testifying? I lost track of the count. & the child trafficking in their home state.. it goes on& on..

Expand full comment

As is your entire comment.

Expand full comment

It was a joke.

For those that don't mind a Clinton murder joke, check out the clip of Norm MacDonald on "The View".

Expand full comment

For those who want people to watch something, include a link. Thanks.

Expand full comment
founding

Amazing how little they comprehend that with Norm, half the joke is the absurdity of the delivery

Expand full comment

Thanks, I’m starving for comedy. Seems it’s been cancelled.

Expand full comment

The best possible sign of Matt's influence and reach would be for him to have readers from all walks of life. I think it's a very positive sign that he even has readers like you.

Expand full comment

What the fuck does that mean?

Expand full comment

He does. When do you go back to WaPo?

Expand full comment

I'm not necessarily saying all of those accusations are true, but when Hillary Clinton asked whether it would be possible to drone Julian Assange and made it clear she wasn't joking after people initially laughed, I wouldn't put much past her or Bill.

Expand full comment

Hillary is clearly that rare thing, a female psychopath. And for a psychopath humans are just dots, and if one of those dots stops moving?

“Look down there. Would you really feel any pity if one of those dots stop moving — forever? If I offered you twenty thousand for every dot that stops, would you really, old man, tell me to keep my money or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare?”

— Harry Lime in The Third Man

Expand full comment

Like you?

Expand full comment

Why yes, as a matter of fact.

Expand full comment

Like you?

Expand full comment
founding

I disagree. Even humorless drones (or "NPCs" as the kids call them nowadays) are welcome here.

Expand full comment

They need to be here too , very much so.

Expand full comment
deletedMar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Whitney Webb has covered the more unbelievable examples. Ron Brown and much of the Commerce Department, who were heavily involved in Chinagate (Hillary's model for Russiagate?), crashed in Croatia, killing many including several who survived the crash or were involved at the airport. Ron Brown infamously was found to have a bullet hole in his skull.

These things happen. With regularity in America now.

Expand full comment

I remain committed to knowing nothing about Arkanciding, including the two guys who died and the third guy who changed his identity.

Expand full comment

By stay safe I hope you don't mean stay quiet. https://youtu.be/1NVnfM_H7TY

Expand full comment
founding

It might be wise to hire a food taster, at the very least.

Expand full comment

Broad fucking daylight. Any broadcast that'll have home. Stay as loud and public as ya can ,Matt.

These fuckers are just gonna be amazingly vile history some day.

Expand full comment

Can't come soon enough.

Expand full comment

They are not necessarily trying to silence Matt, what they are trying to do is scare the hell out of anyone who is even thinking about following in his footsteps.

Tow the party line and you can be a million dollar a year man, worshipped by millions. Tell the truth and you will wind up on SubStack.

Expand full comment
founding

I see it as a two-pronged approach. For someone as well known and respected as Matt (especially after that risible Congressional "panel"), Michael, Bari, etc. they are too big to simply scare into silence. So long as they don't pull a Scott Adams and say or write something that can get them formally cancelled by the SJW shock troops.

The only option the swamp really has is to discredit them, as that grotesque thing from the Virgin Islands and her co-conspirators attempted to do. Not only did they fail spectacularly, they embarrassed themselves and their party by coming off as both unbelievably petty and utterly uninformed about the subject.

The fear factor is directed at us proles. Speak up and risk being branded a domestic terrorist as the FBI bursts through your front door with a battering ram at 4 AM, tosses flash bangs into your infants crib, and shoots the family dog. That'll teach you to shut your mouth. And the reason why these sorts of stunts are played up on the MSM, to reinforce the "message" that you'd better toe the line. Or else.

Though as I write this, I'm recalling MTG and how many times a member of Congress can be SWATed....

Expand full comment

I don't worry so much about Matt's bank. Sure, I wish he made Hannity or Maddow money (I wish you and I did too!), but I think he's happy being rich, and not needing to be super rich. Same with Glenn. More power to 'em.

Expand full comment

The evildoers gangstalk anyone who speaks up.

Expand full comment

100,000 subscribers x $50 yr. = $5,000,000 - whatever the fee substack charges

Expand full comment

Yes, that's true, but most will never see that many. Point taken though.

Expand full comment

substack is immensely more important than the old organizations we used to call the media but are now propaganda outlets staffed, as we see from twitter files, by government gs guys with one point to make. i see they're already setting up 'misinformation' rules for financial news.

every thinking person needs to get on here just like you. it's gonna be under surveillance just as sure as God made little green apples but it is where free people can stand in a public forum.

Expand full comment

SubStack is where the great, the wonderful, Sy Hersh came to Truth Tell.

So yeah! :)

Expand full comment
founding

Substack is a treasure trove of truth (pardon the alliteration), unfortunately it still falls far outside the mainstream for most of America's brain dead muppets. SS exists for those of us seeking the unvarnished facts -- which, to paraphrase Jack Nicolson, most people just can't handle, let alone be bothered to search for.

Expand full comment

Well, that's his business revenue. He has people on his payroll.

But he's doing all right.

Expand full comment

per hundred thousand

Expand full comment

They charge 10% of subscriber fee https://substack.com/ scroll down to “Substack basics” ... It’s free to get started on Substack. If you turn on paid subscriptions, Substack will keep a 10% cut of revenues for operating costs like development and customer support. There are no hidden fees and we only make money when writers do.

Expand full comment

Although strangely DWS (another psychopath or sociopath btw) was like "You make an awful lot of money, don't you?" I don't doubt that she and the others are trying to intimidate everyone into being good boys and girls, but that remark of hers seems to be at odds with the message they want to send.

Expand full comment

Or drive...

https://youtu.be/5QAPdXqnrAA

#michaelhastings

Hastings wrote in his book, "The Operators: The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America's War in Afghanistan," that he received a death threat from a former McChrystal staff member.

"We'll hunt you down and kill you if we don't like what you write," the staffer threatened, according to Hastings, who calmly responded: "Well, I get death threats like that about once a year, so no worries."

Hastings went on to say: "I wasn't disturbed by the claim. Whenever I'd been reporting around groups of dudes whose job it was to kill people, one of them would usually mention that they were going to kill me."

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/conspiracy-theories-abound-michael-hastings-death-article-1.1377392

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

Dim-witted, poor-impulse-control psychopaths.

Expand full comment

I'm worried about that too. They seem to hate him as much as they do Assange.

Expand full comment

The key ID feature was when government charged Assange with rape allegations, a few months after WikiLeaks published the Manning documents. Taibbi will probably soon see pedo charges. Fabricate and pin the most hated of sex crimes on him in order to turn the public.

Expand full comment

God I hope not, but I'd be foolish to rule it out. Although didn't they try to make him out to be a rapist or something before, years ago?

Expand full comment

I was thinking the same thing as I watched the questioning. I believe he's already been in danger for some time, protected somewhat by his large public following. If anything suspicious happens to him, God help the response.

Expand full comment

A personal commitment to share Substack articles and expand the reach and impact of subscription journalism coupled with a centered shift in personal conversation toward preservation of the Republic and the Constitution supported by letter writing campaign's to American elected political leadership.

Expand full comment

As a homeowner fighting foreclosure and an anti-foreclosure advocate, I received FOUR death threats. FOUR. And one came from the legislatorsat my Statehouse. These corrupt fuckers mean business. Fortunately, I told each fucker that I had a huge 51 state network and if they killed me, I would become a martyr, so bring it on!

Expand full comment

I’ve been fighting banks 21 years. Won vs US Bank now I’m winning vs Wells. They did try to break into my house and broke into my car, and stole my dog house which was weird. But when they threatened me on YouTube I called in my network who went crazy with comments. YouTube shows your video more with a bunch of comments so it backfired on them! They’ve tried other tactics hasn’t stopped me.

Expand full comment

I finally settled when I caught the appellate court fabricating a document to unlawfully dismiss my case. I got their fraud captured in court certified documents. And all the sudden, the crooked banks were willing to settle. I moved and was able to buy a house outright with the settlement. Good luck to you! And good luck to the upcoming victims of bank fraud

Expand full comment

Finally found this. That’s good they settled. Fraud upon the court has no statute of limitations.

I settled with US Bank but then my money went into my rental for extraordinary repairs & attorneys fees for years of illegal evictions - now Wells Fargo owes that to me!! That’s fight #2.

Trust me I wish I had just bought a house then instead of standing on me lease but my autistic son didn’t want to move then. Had no idea that despite hiring attorneys I would be in this situation nine years later.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

What are the words "might be" doing in there? Of course he, and others similarly situated, are in danger. The only question is to what degree.

Expand full comment

My hope is that he can be as lucky as Glenn, who's arguably been a thorn in the side of the establishment for longer than Matt has, but whom up until now the establishment has only tried to discredit as opposed to imprisoning or "disappearing" him.

Expand full comment

I didn't know there was any other kind, other than "grave".

Expand full comment

yes these people are evil if ever there was evil.

Expand full comment

I’m kinda glad this is finally sinking in. The Left does not play by the rules and they take no prisoner. If calling yourself Republican is too hard to swallow, well at least you can take sancage in knowing they won’t dynamite your house in the night.....

Expand full comment

If you don't think both sides are abhorrent, you haven't been following politics very long. Remember, the right assassinated JFK, MLK, RFK, Malcolm X, and Fred Hampton.

Expand full comment

Elijah Muhammad is not the “right” by any stretch of the imagination. Malcolm X actually met with the KKK in the early 60s-nothing came of it, but he was objectively in far more physical danger from his own people than literal white racists.

Expand full comment

The mafia/mob assassinated JFK & likely RFK as well.

Expand full comment

Uhh, if that's what you believe.....?

Expand full comment

I didn't catch where he said he had information leading to the arrest and conviction of Hillary Clinton. [evil grin]

Expand full comment

No kidding. If I were in Matt's shoes -- or Shellenberger's or Bari Weiss' -- I'd be very wary of my surroundings, who's lurking in the shadows or whatnot. For the deep state, it's probably a very small step from the type of systemic censorship that these journalists have documented to the type that's biologically permanent.

Expand full comment

Keep doing what you’re doing, Matt. You take the most flack when you’re directly over the target. The psychopaths go full on mentally ballistic when they get called out for their Machiavellian schemes and scams. Wear the old term “Muckraker” with great pride. I’m proud to support your Substack (I think it’s some kind of webpage, or something, I’m not really sure). :/

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

Did you think both Matt and Michael Shellenberger were too laid back in their responses, especially since those asking the questions were aggressive and rude? His response to Wasserman-Schultz, whose face looks like it's made out of rubber, was particularly laid back. Her statement suggested he was just prostituting himself to make money on the Twitter files, as opposed to a journalistic endeavor to bring the truth to the American people. I know it's his style. Citizens United allowed the corporate world the opportunity to give lots of money to candidates of their choice, since their just people, right? Our politicians take their money to finance their campaigns and the money givers get top priority on their agenda, as opposed to those who elected them into office. Now that's a good example of prostituting one's self.

Expand full comment

I really don’t think that. I do think that Matt and Mike were trying to keep their composure in what was sometimes a very hostile environment. The mistake they made was thinking that they were going to appear before a congressional committee that would be reasonable, respectful and thoughtful; and that they could use a logical thought process structure to talk about the issue at hand. I think they did a fine job considering the circumstances. My personal verbal reaction, had I been in their shoes, would have made Caligula blush with shame. I do my best to treat people with kindness and respect in the real world - which is why it’s so disheartening to have watched two good journalists, who were trying their best to report the truth, go through such a disgusting silly ordeal.

Expand full comment
founding

I am shocked by how calm they were in the footage I’ve seen. This is a treacherous situation, reminiscent of the Moscow Show Trials. Seeing powerful politicians spinning scurrilous narratives—as Matt has exposed above—is not the hallmark of a healthy democracy but of a burgeoning tyranny.

I really hoped he would turn the tables during the hearing and declare that the seated representatives are public servants, sworn to uphold the Constitution, which includes the 1st Amendment. It might do the public some good to see the accredited, talented, courageous journalist give a needed, succinct civics lesson. Yes, restraint is most often prudent, but the slumbering masses need a jolt of truth.

Expand full comment

Public Servants? No, "That's not how this works."

Expand full comment

Again. The Twitter file's happened because of our personal investment in subscription journalism and commitment to a new healthy truth/fact based national dialogue. WE'RE WINNING!! The Republican Party is malleable right now and America is watching and listening.

Expand full comment

Yea but because capitalists bit them in the ass.

Twitter gets bought, then Matt et al, whom Musk knew, for sure, from their independent work, supported by us, get unfettered access.

But for that how would anyone really know how far our government has fallen to ideological zealots?

This must be how ordinary people felt about McCarthy, but even that isn’t on this scale.

Today, I sense extreme economic danger to us all from our last weekends (effective) $19T bank guarantee nationalizing that systemic risk.

This administration is wreckless, our corporate leaders often act like idiots, and most hiring is DEI.

Matt and a few others can help turn that tide.

I’ll support them as much as possible.

Expand full comment

I like your positivity!

Expand full comment

The dying cockroach position doesn't help anybody. Most of the psyop is to talk over the top of healthy human reality (our Constitution is healthy human) and convince us we're powerless.

Expand full comment

It occurs to me that an Oscar slap gets more MSM attention than actual scandals now.

Expand full comment

Burgeoning tyranny?

Expand full comment
founding

Touché! But you know there’s plenty of room for this to get much worse. I’m writing this from Paris, which means a thought criminal like me can still travel. And here we are all happily, angrily blathering against the state. These are no small things. Magadan is a probable destination for this show. Until the final destination I plan to enjoy the dying embers of Western Civ.

Expand full comment
founding

Too many people think it can't happen here.

Expand full comment

The best way to keep people imprisoned is to make sure that they never know that they are in prison.

That said, the establishment's increasing reliance on overt censorship and open repression of dissent is not a sign that the establishment is feeling self-assured. Quite the opposite.

Expand full comment

I just closed my LinkedIn account who censored my posts to SBV execs. Fuck the censorship industrial complex. I wont play in their games anymore. No more social media for me. Ever.

Expand full comment

Just read that airlines will soon require than anyone who flies with them has to provide a "mugshot".

Every minute of every hour, they tighten it down more and more.

Try and tell a zoomer about this stuff and they literally don't any concept of what you are talking about.

Expand full comment

Blather is fine, that's the genius of freeish speech, you can say anything. Now go find someone who will listen.

Expand full comment

While they're not (yet) in chains, Matt and Mike were brought before the Inquisitors for blathering against the state.

Expand full comment

Exploding, and metastasizing.

Just wait till they get the surveillance AI's online.

"Not a sparrow will fall"

Expand full comment

Let's do lunch some day soon as I've always wanted to hear a first hand account of what really went down at the "Moscow Show Trials."

Expand full comment

Public wouldn't have seen it if he did that.

Expand full comment

No one is saying they had to act in kind, just more assertive in their statements and their responses. Look, you might disagree with a friend and when you do you're polite, respectful of your differences, but not when you are dealing with adversaries, and they are. No one is saying he should rant and rave, just more assertive, louder. I'm not saying he should have gotten up and hit two timing Wasserman-Schultz in the head.

Expand full comment

Point taken. Respect.

Expand full comment

The truth is that the congresspeople were not there to hear Matt and Mike's testimony. They were there to get their opinions into the Congressional record. They certainly did not want M & M's comments to be entered into the record. One day the record will be referenced, and we can't have the truth being represented there. Only one narrative is allowed.

Expand full comment

“Be careful as we might release The Wasserman Files!”

Expand full comment

Wasn’t she removed from being democrat party election hack, I mean head a few years back? Seem to remember something she was involved in. I was a democrat then. Not anymore.

Expand full comment

In 2016, Wasserman was removed from her position as head of the Democratic National Committee, after WikiLeaks e-mails showed that she was improperly tilting the Democratic nomination process towards Hillary and away from Bernie.

She is still a congressperson from Florida, and quite a piece of work, as her questioning of Matt demonstrated in glorious technicolor.

Expand full comment

She was also chief cheerleader for Hillary during the '08 primaries, saying over and over that Democrat "Superdelegates" could decide to vote for Hillary even if Obama had won their state.

Expand full comment

Thanks. I remember now. It was kind of disappointing at the time. Not that it’s at all surprising now. Cheaters.

Expand full comment

Yes, but only about 1% of the American public remembers that, if they ever knew, which is unlikely.

Expand full comment

Don't be disheartened. Act.

Expand full comment

"The mistake they made was thinking that they were going to appear before a congressional committee that would be reasonable, respectful and thoughtful; and that they could use a logical thought process structure to talk about the issue at hand."

Good guess. Why would anyone above the age of seven believe in that ahistorical, fact free nonsense?

Expand full comment

Yep. But that was the point of their exercise. Obfuscation of their own corruption and ineptitude.

Expand full comment

No, Matt& Michael were not” too laid back.” They exemplified calmness & integrity. Such very rare traits these days in the humans on the planet.

Expand full comment

Yes, but in my opinion, not in this case. My point is not to be critical, and some are responding as if that was my intent. It is not.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

Fair enough, but to your point, in preparing witnesses, the lawyerly advice is to say as little as possible under cross-examination and wait for redirect, which is what they both did.

And politically, the Dems hurt themselves quite enough.

Expand full comment

Maybe so, but not if they are on TV and the world is watching.

Expand full comment

Exactly.

Expand full comment

They were not on trial.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

Yes, I do think they were too laid back. It would have been cool if they'd had an Al Pacino style "I'd take a flame thrower to this place" speech ready to go, but DWS probably would have wheeled out the until-now-secret Congressional guillotine on the spot.

More seriously, IMHO, Matt should have told DWS that when he took on the Twitter Files, he actually expected he would lose both money and social media followers because millions of people like DWS would be really angry with him.

Expand full comment

Put me down for flame thrower. DWS started her blather with a reference to ethics. Personally I would have asked how a person who resigned from the DNC for corrupting democracy could have the gall.

Expand full comment

Tim Canova has lots of nice things to say about Debbie and Brenda Snipes, who illegally destroyed the paper ballots in the 2016 primary.

As Hillary has said "No evidence, no crime."

Expand full comment

Perfect imagery, she is the creature from hell. I'm sending several hundred dollars to Bernie's campaign just thinking maybe no more war, and she's two timing him looking for a Clinton win, the devil herself. Now Bernie with his sweetheart welcome for Clinton wouldn't get a dime from me.

Expand full comment

Hillary branded Bernie as a Putin Puppet (along with Trump, Jill Stein, Tulsi and likely many others).

At least when Rachel Maddow did the same-- "literally"-- to OAN they took her to court (of course the judge ruled that Maddow-- who probably makes more money than Taibbi- is an "entertainer" not a news-person, and thus there was no defamation, she was just exercising her Free Speech. OAN was ordered to pay Maddow's >$200,000 legal fees).

Expand full comment

I can't stand Maddow, and at one time I liked her, but she and those like her is one of the reasons democrats have become so ruthless. They were given free rein during the Trump years. They could push the lie of Russia-gate and garner support from the press and even left wing sites, like Amy Goodman. They were supported by the deep state and courted by neocons and any celebrity could spew Trump hate even calling for his death, so is it any wonder they behave in in an authoritarian manner in regard to dealing with the issue of freedom of speech? They lie when it comes to calling the Jan 6 riot an insurrection, then push for an unconstitutional Jan 6 committee to substantiate their lie. Their authoritarian demeanor supported by many was on full display at the meeting with Taibbi.

Expand full comment

Sanders never even fought back against the smear that PTUIN! supported him. Nader has washed his hands of this man. That says a lot.

Expand full comment

That's the right call by Nader, although sadly Nader believed RussiaGate. I know that no one is right about everything, but it was still disappointing for me.

Expand full comment

Sanders has voted for war repeatedly. After Sander voted no on the invasion of Iraq in 03, in his cute performative way, he then voted several times to fund it when few were paying attention. He has since said that he regretted that, which is yet more performance.

Bernie's role in the great psychodrama is as the designated rebel. Sanders and his wife Jane are "good friends" with the Bidens, they have dinner parties.

Expand full comment

I have come to understand that. The dems were not always so self serving. Thomas Franks books take you on their journey of their decline, and citizens united passed by the Supreme Court really didn't help.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the book tip, Fran...yeah, Thomas Frank is among the most perceptive obervers of what is going on. I'll check it out.

Expand full comment

Spot on, Bill Owen. Yes, the Bern is a putz of the first order...another example of the hypocrisy of the system....Trump remains the only national politician in my lifetime who has taken this system on, which is why he is still so popular in spite of his many flaws.

Expand full comment

Trump didn't and has never "taken the system on." This "system" you so casually and opaquely reference is the same "system" that has enriched (in your lifetime) a charlatan and serial criminal such as your man Trump while simultaneously impoverishing millions of Americans.

Trump merely took advantage of a "system" that was clearly screwing 90% of the population and rode his revanchist rhetoric to electoral victory. Helped greatly by the crude and cynical political strategy the cretinous Steve Bannon and other fascist whisperers whispered in his ear along the way.

Trump is, however, the first politician in your "lifetime" (how many years stacked up in your "lifetime?") to say the quiet part out loud, the sort of stuff which has always attracted and turned on the worst elements of American society. Always. From the very beginning. You can see the zebra, Pacificus---now start looking for the stripes.

Expand full comment

Nope. This isn't a movie it's our live's. Always remain calm when dealing with viper's.

Expand full comment

"Did you think both Matt and Michael Shellenberger were too laid back in their responses....?"

One of the things I learned back in the days of USENET was to drive my opponents crazy by never losing my cool, never turning nasty, never failing to be polite. (Something I had gotten from martial arts long ago in a different world.) Those who are stupid or evil or fools can't help revealing themselves; you don't have to do it. Although in the case of the goons Mr. Taibbi was up against, I might have let a light snicker escape for the benefit of DWSh and Tinfoil Hat Man.

Expand full comment

Just to see Matt slightly shaking his head in wonder and Michael's faint smile was enough for me...superior in every way to their interrogators.

Expand full comment

They looked weak. They got beat.

Expand full comment

Matt and Michael did well, under the circumstances. You can't mount much of a case if you're not allowed to speak.

Expand full comment

No one said they had to act like their interrogators, but I do think they were too low key in their responses which might make people see them as intimidated, and provide their accusers with more credibility. Their distain also says, I don't hold you, or what you claim in high regard.

Expand full comment

I was not impressed. This is not usenet.

I really like Matt, but he is not a mud wrestler.

Expand full comment

I think both were completely flabbergasted by the total lack of ethics displayed by Plackett, W-Schultz and Garcia. The calm responses they gave in response to these evil, Stasi inquisitors made me envision the ocean of difference between Matt and Mike, and the complete abandonment of any pretense by the democrats to follow our Constitution.

Expand full comment

I had the same take on it that you did, because we know their work and the truth of it, but democrats watching didn't see it the way we did, and their silence only made them look guilty of the accusations thrown at them. People I know who are democrats have already expressed that opinion to me, and you can't say anything to them.

Expand full comment

Perhaps, but committed progressives squeed so hard during the hearings they damaged their vocal chords. They debate like schoolchildren for real, it is not performative.

https://youtu.be/fH-z61ghvV8?t=38

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 15, 2023

I saw clips of Turley responding to Wasseman-Schultz and he came across as lethargic, like he skipped a good night's sleep. The democrats during Trump's term in office came off as an authoritarian lot, and they go lots of backing even from the left who hated Trump and used no sense of objectivity in their reporting and even swallowed up Russia-gate. That kind of back-up including that which they got from the FBI and CIA can make people feel invincible, and make them feel like no one should question them. They're following a political agenda of world wide hegemony. now that's pretty authoritarian. I just read Taibbi voted for Joe Biden, Good grief.

Expand full comment

I do think their laid back demeanour was an asset and added to their credibility. It amplified the ridiculousness of those who jumped at every chance to chastise them. They reminded me of horrible abusive teachers that love the abuse of power bestowed in the process..."I didnt ask you a question...I want more time".

Expand full comment

Well, they did come across as abusive authority figures, you see it and I do, and like myself you support his work and it's importance in regard to free speech. However most of the audience watching don't even know him, or his work on Twitter, and the majority are not even paying attention. Johnathan Turley was also cross examined and here is a headline from and article that quotes him, Turley: 'Twitter Files Hearing Was A "Soviet Show Trial," Democrats Used It To Attack Free Speech And A Free Press." I saw a short video clip of Turley going through the same thing, and he seemed rather taken aback by their accusations and demeanor, at least in that short clip. You certainly don't want people to see that the democrats can render you speechless, or have the power to do so.

Expand full comment

I don’t think being more aggressive would have been a good idea. In fact they were probably hoping they would - because then they can call them partisans.

Expand full comment

Being more assertive does not mean one has to be aggressive.

Expand full comment

No, they weren't too laid back in that setting. They should have never gone there in the first place. But, it is not the place to fight back or argue. It was a lose-lose situation for them always.

Expand full comment

Probably your right, no winning them over, but they did have an audience that were watching from home.

Expand full comment

Agree with you, but also understand it would be hard to crawl down to DWS’ level to legitimize her comments with a one-on response.

Expand full comment

Yup…”kill ‘em’ with kindness” is a philosophy I try to subscribe to. Those kinds of people generally have no problem with showing themselves to be the mental midgets that they truly are. I’ll take truth and integrity over posing as some kind of holier than thou fraud everyday of the week, and twice on Sunday.

Expand full comment

That was Matt's best burn there, saying that the info from the hack was true.

Expand full comment

I can't stand her either. No, he doesn't have to crawl under the table and scream, and call her names, just more assertive.

Expand full comment

I agree, though I think for the most part they weren't really allowed to. They would get forced into yes/no answers, cut off when trying to explain, or simply not even being given the opportunity to respond. I felt that Matt and Michael were taking their oaths seriously, and so felt compelled to give truthful answers that were necessarily complicated, and those complications made them look wishy washy or uncertain, because these assholes are so used to blanket bullshit definitive statements, like the kinds they were making themselves.

I found the format of these hearings to be really unhelpful for actually getting at the truth. I feel like maybe witnesses should be given an opportunity to respond after each committee member has their 5 minutes, especially since the whole point of the meeting is to hear from the witnesses.

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

I don't disagree that they were shut down, but it would have been better had they spoken up, and louder. I've seen Glen Greenwald really stand up to people like them. I'm not being critical of them personally, and I know Matt is more subdued in his responses, but it's like the whole thing went no where. The only thing I came away with is knowing the decision I made to disassociate myself from the democratic party during the Trump years was reaffirmed as a very wise decision.

Expand full comment

I saw a clip of Matt Walsh's recent appearance before a committee and that was a great example of not taking any shit from these assholes. I thought he did a great job of making them look stupid.

Expand full comment

Thanks, Ill look that up.

Expand full comment

They were limited as to what they could do. They tried to speak up many times and were overruled/quieted by the questioner. "You don't get to ask questions" was said many times.

Expand full comment

The reptilian part of my brain would've liked it a lot if he'd answered DWS by telling her to go fuck herself, or if he theatrically yawned while Allred was lecturing him, stuff like that. However, I think that might have been doing them a favor; just as people willing to say so are now pointing out how childish and petty the Democrats were, if Matt and/or Michael had been confrontational then there would be all of these pieces in The Atlantic and The Daily Beast and so on about "Look at how these 'journalists' talked to Democrats, clearly they have an axe to grind and that's one more reason why none of you should trust them."

I also don't know what it takes to be charged with contempt of Congress, whether being rude right back could have set them up for that or not.

Expand full comment

I am not saying they should be confrontational, just a lot more assertive in their position. I have felt for quite some time that the democrats during the Trump years were quite authoritarian and the reason they could be, is that the media and many on the left supported their lie of Russia-gate and most went on a brutal attack of Trump, with no shades of grey anywhere. They even managed to impeach him in the house. They were supported by the deep state, and the neocons even shifted to their side, which is telling. If they didn't instigate Jan 6, I feel they were complicit on some level, and then made the claim a riot was an insurrection. They moved on with a January 6 comm, which was unconstitutional on many levels, and even tried to prevent Tucker Carlson from showing a different perspective on what happened on that day. . No one is saying they should have been rude, but definitely supported their case more forcefully. The democrats were engaged in preventing freedom of speech on Twitter and the CIA backs them up when it comes to Hunter Biden's laptop. Russian disinformation? The Intercept wouldn't even allow Greenwald his story on the lap top. The very fact that the democrats came across in that combative and disrespectful manner shows just how authoritarian they have become. Yeah they should have been confronted. Their hatred of Trump even gave free rein to hate speech calling for Trump's death, by non other then two bit actors.

Expand full comment

All of that is true about Democrats. Never thought I'd live to see the day when Republicans would be better or less bad than Democrats, but it's here. (And since people like MTG were victims of the very censorship that they're arguing against, I can believe that at least some of them are sincere about wanting to put an end to censorship instead of just grandstanding to make themselves look righteous.)

The question is what to do about it, either to stop them cold or failing that to show them that they can't do this kind of crap without pushback of one kind or another. You could be right about it being better for Matt and Michael to have handled it differently. And I could be wrong about what I say next, and here's what I say next...

I'm thinking about how these exchanges play to the normies who see them. Matt and Michael are being pretty civil, all things considered, and the Democrats in that hearing are coming across like bullies. Like, yes, authoritarians. Jimmy Dore's video about this, which I haven't watched it yet, is entitled "Dems Attack ‘Twitter Files’ Journalists & Completely Clown Themselves!" I want to believe that this is what most people who saw those exchanges took away as well.

Expand full comment

The vast majority of people don't watch this. I think most people are not tuned into what is going on at all. My brother with a phd in neurology thinks Maddow can tell him all he needs to know. I rest my case. I watched Jimmy Dore on on this one, and Aaron Mate is there as well. Good listening. I was always a registered democrat and during the Trump years became an independent, which means voting Republican also.

Expand full comment

I totally felt the same way, particularly given how one sided the format is in who gets to control the conversation. I also think there needs to be more pushback when people demand yes or no answers. I get that it can stop a hostile witness from waffling, but telling a person what answer they are allowed to give is basically not allowing them to answer at all. You might as well say, "please just answer yes to the following question"...

Expand full comment

you nailed it.

Expand full comment

Totally.

But that's just who Matt is. Schellenberger, who I don't know, did better, but not much better. Greenwald would have gutted them.

Matt's strength is his writing.

Expand full comment

An experienced litigator would be the only people to gut those fuckers. All of those people are attorneys, so they have years of experience promoting lies as facts.

Expand full comment

they are different skills. Though, I think Greenwald could come off as shrill. I dont have a lot of respect for people like DWS but they know how to play to their base and the MSM will aid them. I would be very wary to get in a shouting match with them in this forum.

The old sayig dont argue with an idiot, people wont know the difference pops to mind.

Expand full comment

As noted elsewhere in this discussion, the committee did not allow the witnesses to respond. They could have raised Vyshinsky from the dead and had him conduct the "questioning." Greenwald would never have been allowed to do his lawyerly-discursive thing.

Expand full comment

you are right, though members on oth sides tend to do that - it is very disappointing

Expand full comment

The first time i saw Greenwald he was pretty young, and was confronted by two older politicians that thought he was easy prey, oh, but were they mistaken.

Expand full comment

Glenn Greenwald is an attorney as well as being a journalist. It takes a litigator to understand how to think fast when you are being berated by attorneys from legislative bodies. They count on that.

I think Matt and Michael did fantastic for not being attorneys!

Expand full comment

Karen, almost everyone I know is a democrat, and I have spoken to a few who saw what went on, and thought people like Wasserman Schultz put them in their place. I am not being critical of them on a personal level, but already some people have said to me they couldn't, defend their position because they had none. Democrats have become loud, aggressive, and combative and their supporters are no different. Johnathan Turley was subjected to the same crap and also felt pushed into a corner, and wrote a scathing piece on them.

Expand full comment

Ugh, that sounds awful, Fran. Well, my other reply to you described what I hoped was true, and I really hope that although people who are dumb enough to still vote blue no matter who feel that way, that those who do not vote blue no matter who and those who have given up on the Democratic Party entirely comprise a majority of Americans and are disgusted by the way DWS and those other shitheads acted.

Expand full comment

You need new friends.

Expand full comment

They wouldn’t have showed up for him

Expand full comment

I would suspect replying in kind would have played into their hands

Expand full comment

No, to me it looked like they got the upper hand, not that I believed them, but no doubt many did. Just look at how they pushed the lie of Russia-gate, and it's been disputed and yet many if not most people continue to believe it.

Expand full comment

Human moral reality is not what the psyop say's it is.

Expand full comment

Honestly, I think this is a really dumb question. They were fine. They were exactly as they should’ve been. They were perfect.

Expand full comment
Mar 19, 2023·edited Mar 19, 2023

Well, not to offend, but you sound like the democrats during that hearing who want me to tell you what you want to hear. Forget about it.

Expand full comment

Haha

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Took an extended gander at your substack. Heartened to see Taibbi's still attracting the Walter Lippmann types to HIS substack...

Expand full comment

You can only be a whistleblower if you are accusing Republicans. Ridiculous

Expand full comment

As a former DNC member, I'm truly embarrassed to have ever been associated with what's now the Democratic Party.

https://beyondspin.wordpress.com/2023/03/12/welcome-to-my-upside-down-world/

Welcome to my upside down world

Expand full comment

I hear ya Beyond Spin. my parents were both very active Texas Democrats in the 70’s and 80’s. I remember going to fundraisers and voting drives with them. I was taught that the Democrats were the working class party that stood up for the little guys and fought like Hell to protect free speech, free thinking and the First Amendment.

well, I don’t have to explain what happened since then, but lets just say I will never vote blue no matter who for the long, foreseeable future.

I am disgusted that I spent decades voting for these people while passionately trying to persuade other to vote the same.

maybe it was always like this. maybe I am too naive.

at one point tho, I thought they were the good guys.

this is too sad...

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

"...at one point tho, I thought they were the good guys."

A lot of us did. And maybe, once upon a time, they Dems were "the good guys."

But not now.

Expand full comment

#metoo. I really don’t know if they were ever the good guys, but I was raised to think they were and turned 18 the year Bush won, which reinforced that belief of mine we he said he opposed foreign intervention then blew up Iraq for no reason. I really didn’t even start paying attention to any Republican candidate until 2016ish. I’m grateful I ate some humble pie, but having young kids feel immense guilt I helped usher in some of the lunatics destroying their generation and robbing them of freedoms they have to be taught they should have been entitled to.

Expand full comment

I’ve been registered all parties through the year s. Sadly they work for themselves now, not for us. None of them should be so rich as public servants!

Expand full comment

No, you weren’t naive. Me and most of my family and friends were in the same boat. The Democrats actually WERE the good guys back then, but now the script has been flipped and they are firmly in bad guy camp, along with most Republicans. It truly is the Uniparty. Sadly, most of my family and peers are still in the “blue no matter who” camp...

Expand full comment

The lesson here is never be too sure you're the good guys, because that's how you become the bad guys. We've all passed this test this time around. It's just so distressing how many failed it.

Expand full comment

Truth be told, the politic that has informed my adult life has been a choice between the Bad Guys and the Worse Guys...I think that still holds.

Expand full comment

Flipped over!!! Keep sharing truth!

Expand full comment
founding

‘We Had To Destroy The Republic In Order To Save It.’

I feel you pain, BP. World peace, civil liberties & the supporting the working class used to be Democrat core values. Now they are deemed the telltale signs of a right wing terrorist.

I’m waiting for some swine at the podium to announce that they had to destroy the republic in order to save it, because that is what they are accomplishing. September 11th with its Patriot Act started the process, but the Trump chimera really got the ball rolling. Covid hysteria accelerated the process of stifling debate. January 6th was this regime’s Reichstag moment, petrifying the faithful into braying for establish concentration camps.

Back when the body politic had a functioning mind, most people saw blanket censorship, surveillance, propaganda & perpetual war as pillars of tyranny, not democracy. Today these are the core values of the Democrat faithful.

Expand full comment

"I’m waiting for some swine at the podium to announce that they had to destroy the republic in order to save it"

They did.

Build Back Better wtf To build back, you need to destroy.

Things were going very well, this lying old guy gets power, and announces the tag line Build Back Better. Combined with Obama's Third Term, we were warned.

Expand full comment

So I take it you believe that our nation's infrastructure is just fine and needs little upkeep or rebuilding? If so you'll especially enjoy the collapse of the power grid when and if electric cars become affordable to more than Delorean collectors, bitcoin enthusiasts and monied liberals.

Expand full comment

Left/Right is a false construct introduced to confuse and control.

Expand full comment

Until the majority of Americans come to understand that they are being tag-teamed, that power plays good cop, bad cop with us, then nothing will change, nothing can change.

"Both" sides agree on all the "important" stuff, like endless war, the wealth transfer, and condition free LOVE for Israel, just to name a few.

“There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently … and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties.”

― Gore Vidal

Expand full comment

It's not upside down..

It's Communism. These people will lock you up if can get away with it.

They don't care and won't stop until a clear majority can see things clearly

Expand full comment

No it's not "communism". It's fascism, the merger of state and corporate power

https://beyondspin.wordpress.com/2022/10/28/fascism-is-the-merger-of-state-and-corporate-power/

Expand full comment
Mar 14, 2023·edited Mar 14, 2023

Vasily Grossman wrote the "War and Peace" for WWII in the two-volume "Stalingrad" and "Life and Fate".

I can't recommend them enough, and they provide a wonderful look at Stalin's Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany. They are both hellish societies, but you realize that what we all hate about them is not the economic system. (one derives from capitalism and one from communism). What makes them awful is that they are authoritarian police states based on fear, where everyone is afraid to talk.

That's the danger we are facing now in the US, and what the people need to do is put aside theoretical differences and unite behind removing the bought politicians of both parties and scaling back the national security state spying and policing agencies.

Expand full comment

Exactly. I am amazed that people don't see it.

Instead of nationalizing the private sector, the left has co-opted it to push its ideology.

The problem is that if you bring it up, the left says it is impossible because fascism is "right wing." Why? because Wikipedia says so. So it can't be true.

Expand full comment

Communism?

Communism didn't put giant corporations in control of the Congress and the Senate.

Expand full comment

Why don't you get the ball rolling by starting to see things more clearly.

Expand full comment

I'm a longtime voter for Democratic Party candidates, but at this point am feeling extremely alienated from the party. Called up my Congressional rep today and spoke with an actual live staffer.

My Congresscritter isn't on the Weaponized Gov't Subcommittee, but I let him know that I was completely disgusted by his fellow party members' anti-First Amendment conduct and if he and his party wanted my vote they'd better start standing up for my rights.

It seems likely that in 2024 there will be a rematch in the presidential election. It also appears that the Democratic Party is doing everything in its power to lose that election. I don't think that the Republican Party is any better in general, probably worse in fact, but if the Democratic Party thinks I'm going to keep on showing up and filling in bubbles for them, then they've got another thing coming.

Expand full comment