Threats Continue Against Rumble Video Platform – The Background Players Seem Interestingly Connected


Posted originally on the CTH on September 25, 2023 | Sundance 

The British tabloid, The Sun, comes out with another story against the Rumble video platform today, receiving considerable condemnation for the threats and implications that appear to be coordinated by the Murdoch network.

The original sketchy hit against Russell Brand came from the Murdoch owned publication The Sunday Times.

The British Parliament then weighed in, demanding that Rumble deplatform, censor or demonetize Mr. Brand.

The Sun tabloid is now claiming that Rumble will be “regulated by UK media watchdog Ofcom under the new Online Safety Bill, which was approved by Parliament last week and is due to become law next month.”  Additionally, they claim, “failing to co-operate with Ofcom could put Rumble executives at risk of arrest if visiting Britain, it has been suggested.”

That latter claim is pure fear-porn, driven by interests who want to control the overall internet content of information on behalf of the Public-Private partnership, technically government.

However, look closely at the alignment of interests pushing this anti-Rumble narrative, and you will note something very interesting.

The Associated Press is pushing a story today that Rumble’s relationship with the Fox News Business GOP debate implicates the Republican Party with, “far-right extremism, bigotry, election disinformation and conspiracy theories.”  The Fox Business News network is owned by Rupert Murdoch.  Noticing anything yet?

Stay with me, this is going to get interesting…..

[AP] – […]  By bringing viewers to Rumble to watch the second GOP debate, as it did with the first one last month, the Republican National Committee is driving potential voters to a site crawling with content that flouts the rules of more mainstream platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and YouTube.

Earlier this year, RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said using Rumble instead of YouTube as its livestreaming partner was a decision aimed at “getting away from Big Tech.”

Asked about the criticism of the platform, the RNC said in an email that “hate, bigotry and violence is unfortunately prevalent on every social media platform, and the RNC condemns it entirely, but the RNC does not manage content or pages outside of our own.”

Rumble, founded in 2013, prides itself on being “immune to cancel culture.” Its website says “everyone benefits when we have access to more ideas, diverse opinions, and dialogue.”

That approach has catapulted the site to popularity in recent years as many conservatives have sought alternative social media companies that won’t remove their posts or suspend their accounts for false or inflammatory content. The company, which went public in 2022, has been backed by conservative donors such as venture capitalist Peter Thiel and Republican Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio. (read more

The Rumble platform is growing, as more content providers find that Rumble will stand beside them firmly against censorship and efforts to silence their voice.  Content providers are flocking to Rumble as a free and safe alternative to YouTube.  That has put Rumble in the position of being a threat to those who want control over information.

There is obviously an organized effort underway to target Rumble as we head into the 2024 election, and none of these suddenly appearing efforts are a coincidence.

Here’s my working theory.

Elon Musk needs money. The finance side of the “X platform”, or what was previously called Twitter, is very fragile – with $1.5 billion in annual debt service ($12.5bn loan), and roughly another $750+ million in operating expenses (Amazon cloud $200m, Google cloud $200m, payroll $350m est).  After Musk stripped it down, Twitter still costs around $2.25bn per year.  Current revenue is around $1bn from advertising and a few million from subscribers.  Musk has been looking for answers, and that’s why he hired Linda Yaccarino.

Billionaire Club – There is an alignment of interests here.  Musk wants eyeballs so he can give Yaccarino tools to sell the platform to potential advertising corporations.  Tucker Carlson is an eyeball resource for Musk.  However, I suspect Rupert Murdoch is the silent financial bridge that Elon needed.  That explains why Ron DeSantis was launched on Twitter.

Recently Rupert Murdoch stated he was stepping down from the board of Fox.  This would clear the runway of leftist controversy in supporting Twitter. At the same time, Murdoch’s media empire is launching attacks against Rumble and has a connection to all of the anti-Rumble narratives swirling.  [ Imagine if Tucker Carlson found out Musk and Murdoch were aligned.]

According to insider sources, not directly connected to Rumble, Peter Thiel is dumping Rumble stock and may be using that money to invest in a rumored Tucker Carlson media platform.  The one thing they (Peter, Elon, Rupert) would not want is for Tucker to switch his transitional broadcast away from Twitter.

I suspect that behind this obvious Murdoch targeting of Rumble, there’s something like this that connects this all to the Murdoch effort to manipulate political outcomes.  This guy is notorious for trying to manipulate U.S. politics, and the next story that follows is a clear example…..

Last points.

We need to support Rumble.

When an ally in the fight against those attempting to control information comes under attack, we need to support them.  Here’s three ways:

♦ Download the app.

♦ Invest in Rumble stock.

♦ Become a registered user on the platform.

Article 5 Against Ukraine?


Armstrong Economics Blog/War Re-Posted Nov 18, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: Ukraine attacked Poland. Does this not make Ukraine an enemy now since they struck  a nato country?

REPLY: That would certainly be a plot twist. It would never happen since the agenda is to go to war with Russia. Zelensky did not immediately apologize to Poland for killing two Polish citizens, as he was hoping his new friends would blame Russia and immediately begin World War III.

It was a very passive apology as well. He apologized for the “Russian missile terror” and alleviated himself of any blame. “Expressed condolences over the death of Polish citizens from Russian missile terror. We exchanged available information and are clarifying all the facts. Ukraine, Poland, all of Europe and the world must be fully protected from terrorist Russia,” Zelensky said on Twitter.

Technically, Ukraine did attack Poland. Poland is a NATO member, and Ukraine is not. It does not matter if it was an accident, as they can use any excuse to start a full-scale global war under the current conditions of NATO that say “any” attack could be grounds for collective defense.

As Article 5 notes:

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”

Rumble Rejects French Govt Demand for Control Over Content


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 2, 2022 | Sundance

The team at Rumble Video have taken a strong position in defense of free speech, an open internet and protection of a diverse public square.

Apparently, the French government demanded that Rumble remove content the government does not support. [SourceRumble said no.

Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski then followed up delivering a statement via Twitter: “The French Government has demanded that Rumble (@rumblevideo) block Russian news sources. Like @elonmusk, I won’t move our goal posts for any foreign government. Rumble will turn off France entirely (France isn’t material to us) and we will challenge the legality of this demand.”

Pavlovski and Rumble being transparent and making the demand from the French government public raises a few questions.

Rumble said ‘no’, but who said ‘yes’?

It would be highly unlikely that Rumble is the only tech platform the French government have contacted with their demands.  What did the other platform providers do?

How many other ‘western‘ governments make demands on content from Big Tech platform providers that we do not know about?

On the domestic side, the issue of what France is demanding is essentially analogous with what the U.S. government (DHS) has been doing within the censorship discussion recently highlighted by The Intercept.   However, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Google and Microsoft have not been open with the American people about these back-channel discussions and demands from the U.S. government.

Most of what we are now learning about government control over social media content is coming as a result of a lawsuit filed by the State of Missouri against the Biden administration.

(New York Post) –  A little-noticed federal lawsuit, Missouri v. Biden, is uncovering astonishing evidence of an entrenched censorship scheme cooked up between the federal government and Big Tech that would make Communist China proud.

So far, 67 officials or agencies — including the FBI — have been accused in the lawsuit of violating the First Amendment by pressuring Facebook, Twitter and Google to censor users for alleged misinformation or disinformation.

Victims of the Biden-Big Tech “censorship enterprise” include The Post, whose Hunter Biden laptop exposé was suppressed by Facebook and then Twitter in October 2020 after the FBI went to Facebook, warning it with great specificity to watch out for a “dump” of Russian disinformation, pertaining to Joe Biden, with an uncanny resemblance to our stories.

“We allege that top-ranking Biden administration officials colluded with those social media companies to suppress speech about the Hunter Biden laptop story, the origins of COVID-19, the efficacy of masks, and election integrity,” is how the lawsuit was summarized by intrepid Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, who is leading the action.

The censorship related to alleged “misinformation” about pandemic lockdowns, vaccines and COVID-19, and included material from the esteemed infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists associated with the Great Barrington Declaration, which proved over time to be correct and eventually much of which was adopted as official policy by the CDC.

Defendants include FBI special agents Elvis Chan and Laura Dehmlow, who gave Facebook that detailed “disinformation” briefing right before The Post was censored; White House press secretaries, current and former, Karine Jean-Pierre and Jen Psaki; Dr. Anthony Fauci, the president’s chief medical adviser, and former White House senior COVID-19 adviser Andrew Slavitt; counsel to President Biden Dana Remus; the DHS over the disbanded Disinformation Governance Board; the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency; the FDA; the State Department; and the US Election Assistance Commission.

Last month a federal judge ordered a reluctant Fauci and Jean-Pierre to hand over their records, so the case is progressing nicely.(read more)

As various entities and Big Tech platforms prepare to launch lawfare litigation, a strategy built on threats, against any member of the Rebel Alliance who outlines the schemes and connections between government and Big Tech, they would be wise to reconsider the unstable cornerstone of their position…

…Why would any social media platform, at any scale and on any level, be in any relationship with the United States government?