After Years of Being Lied to About Covid-19, The Public Now Jumps on Board with New Ukraine Lies

 You remember Snake Island--the brave Ukrainians who lost their lives defending it and the Ukrainian President's vow to posthumously award them the equivalent of a medal of honor? Except they aren't dead. By why quibble over words? After all, Ukraine will say one thing and then say the exact opposite without blinking an eye.

Remember that the Ukrainians were winning--they were stopping Russian forces? Oh, but they also were losing and needed NATO's help and weapons. Which is it? 

Remember that the Russians ran out of food and gas? This was spread all over the Western news while the Russian news reported that they would periodically halt troop movement because they thought Ukraine wanted to negotiate or in some cases to allow citizens to flee. But we can't have Russians looking like humanitarians, so we came up with the most ridiculous scenario we could find: they were out of food and gas. Because Russia isn't one of the largest exporters of wheat and gas? Why are the Russians advancing now? Did they suddenly figure out how to fill up?

Then there was the holocaust memorial that was bombed. Note: this was not done in the first days of the attack, although it could have been, but people still stayed in Kyiv and that museum happened to be close to communications targets. So, five people, who apparently chose not to evacuate, lost their lives. Was it a direct target attacking Jewish people? Or was it a missile gone astray from its communications target? 

Then there is that: Western news reports more than half a million people have evacuated Ukraine while at the same time stating that Russia is surrounding cities and preventing people from evacuating. Which is it? 

Lies like this that were blatant throughout COVID-19 should be easy for Western readers to spot--but apparently we have lost all our common sense. When "four legs good; two legs bad" becomes "four legs good; two legs better" we all have a lot more than Russians to worry about.

Snopes: Forgetting How to Fact-Check Again

 Oh, Snopes, what a tangled web of lies you weave sometimes. You admit Hunter Biden was "dismissed" as an officer, but then say that is "most likely" a "general discharge."  False. Hunter Biden stated he had an administrative discharge, but he also seems to have lost everything as if he had been court martialed and dismissed. The "dismissal" of an officer is the equivalent to a dishonorable discharge. Officers cannot be dishonorably discharged--only "dismissed." "If an officer is convicted by a General Court-Martial, then that officer's sentence can include a "dismissal." This is considered to be the same as a dishonorable discharge." Further, if Hunter Biden resigned before his court martial, he would have been given an administrative discharge that was Other Than Honorable (which is similar to a dishonorable discharge but not as severe). If he received a "general" administrative discharge, this would draw some scrutiny, especially since others in the military have served 19 years honorably, tested positive for cocaine once and were not only dishonorably discharged, but also jailed. But with the military sealing the records, we will probably never know if Joe asked former President Obama (as head of the military) to pull a few strings for his son. That's right: the military has not released any details about the discharge Hunter received. Ironically, if Hunter had been court martialed, President Obama could have been the judge, sealed the records, and Hunter could have said anything he wanted about his discharge. President Trump, however, does have access to those records, so it blows my mind Snopes would feel they can fact-check his statement accurately. Fact checking requires finding original documents to support or disavow the claim. Snopes did not have access to any documents and merely gave their opinion on the matter based on Hunter Biden's own claims.

If Joe wouldn't have found a job in Ukraine for Hunter, his boy probably wouldn't have been able to afford any more cocaine since his discharge had civilian effects apparently similar to the dishonorable or "other than honorable" discharge. Granted, Hunter Biden managed to jump through many walls that normal people could not have just to join the military the way he did. At the time, I wanted an investigation into whether the whole war in Ukraine was because Hunter needed a job after his "dismissal. It was all too convenient in my opinion especially with documented inappropriate US interference. Why don't people care that while making $80,000+ per MONTH in Ukraine that Hunter stated he couldn't afford to pay child support to an out-of-wedlock kid he had in court? Please Democrats, you love to jump on everything the President does wrong, why don't you let Joe's faults come out, too... oh, I forgot. You don't support free speech. I don't understand how you are okay with Joe getting a job for his son numerous times but you are also okay with Joe locking down the country again and putting millions of hard-working Americans out of work--perhaps permanently.

Those Who Support Free Speech Should Drop Twitter

 Twitter banned the President's account for stating facts. The President's posts this year that have stated other facts have been removed. 

For some reason, we don't want Russia posting truth about our candidates nor do we want our President posting facts about the opposing side. Hunter Biden got a job that paid $80,000 per year (among other jobs) because he was Joe Biden's son.

Former President Bush actually gave Hunter Biden a job on a Railroad safety board back during his Presidency. This was another job that Hunter himself stated he got because his dad was Joe Biden. Perhaps this is why Bush does not vote for or back President Trump. President Trump is allowing investigations into Epstein; Prince Andrew was buddies with Epstein, and Prince William backs Biden (whom presumably will stop the investigations). 

Now, I will tell you right here that I did not vote for President Trump in the last election. I don't like President Trump's attitudes or most of his Twitter activity. But I do support free speech. And blocking the President from giving facts on an account that was followed by many, is wrong. Americans already are facing enormous Social Media censorship because Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats threatened them if they did not censor President Trump and his supporters. This is not the American way. We have free speech even if others do not like that speech as long as it doesn't put anyone in danger. 

Whether you are an American or not, whether you are a Republican or not, you have to take a stand against this censorship, or YOUR VOICE might be the next one banned. Close your Twitter accounts in protest and find other outlets that allow free speech to use.