A Popular QAnon Twitter Account That Claims To Have Explosive DC Dirt Is Really Just A Random Italian Guy

There�s othing new about unstable right-wing crackpots and fraudsters generating fake news and bizarre conspiracy theories on the internet. The more important point is the way the Trump White House and the traditional conservative media now elevate this propaganda and try to make it credible, which is the real threat to democracy.

Trump didn�t start this though. Does anyone remember the Bush White House planting a �reporter� in the White House press corps supposedly named �Jeff Gannon�. Despite the fact that nobody had ever heard of him or his news outlet he was not only issued a security clearance and press pass but the White House frequently called upon him during press briefings where he would lob partisan Pro-conservative softball questions. Turns out he was really a gay male escort website host named James Guckert with no journalism experience. Given his special access privileges and what we know about all the closet homosexuals in conservative circles, it sounds like he was a side piece for someone in the Bush White House inner circle :



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gannon


Anyways you can draw a straight (no pun intended) line from there to rhe current situation. Republicans have had America on a slippery slope to banana republic status for a very long time.

The only "explosive" thing the pro-Trump conspiracy "media" has, or deserves to have, is explosive diarrhea.

So why do you (and the person who wrote the article) feel the need to keep bringing up the reporters sexual orientation? What does that have to do with the story? If someone is unqualified, than they are unqualified. End of story. If the reporter was unqualified and straight, the part about him being straight would never be mentioned. Not by the writer of the article,and not by you. So why the double standard when someone is gay?

So why do you (and the person who wrote the article) feel the need to keep bringing up the reporters sexual orientation? What does that have to do with the story? If someone is unqualified, than they are unqualified. End of story. If the reporter was unqualified and straight, the part about him being straight would never be mentioned. Not by the writer of the article,and not by you. So why the double standard when someone is gay?
Because many conservatives work tirelessly to cause problems for gay people? They actively shit on their existence and try to de-legitimize their lifestyle. It makes them hypocritical.

So why do you (and the person who wrote the article) feel the need to keep bringing up the reporters sexual orientation? What does that have to do with the story? If someone is unqualified, than they are unqualified. End of story. If the reporter was unqualified and straight, the part about him being straight would never be mentioned. Not by the writer of the article,and not by you. So why the double standard when someone is gay?

When anti-gay conservatives pushing anti-gay policies turn out to be closet homosexuals just trying conceal their own identities it is totally relevant.

Many? But not all? Do we have any proof that this "reporter" was causing problems for gay people? Many black people cause problems for other black people . You know shooting up the neighborhood in drivebys, slinging dope, etc. Do we get to push every black person against a wall for a pat down and run them through the system? A lot of cities/police departments think so. I disagree.

I have a problem with this movement where the left thinks that it is ok to out someone just because they are conservative. Being conservative is mainly about less government. Many gay people are very wealthy, take Siegfried and Roy for example. Maybe they just want to keep their hard earned wealth. Maybe they do not wish to give away the vast majority of their wealth to the government for redistribution to a bunch of couch surfing, dope smoking, video game playing losers. Why does someone wanting to keep what they worked so hard for give someone else the right to out them? Who gets to create these checklist where someone has to sign off on a bunch of left wing crap to be gay? People are born gay. That is not a choice. Someone's politics is a choice. People outing other people because they do not agree with their politics is bullying, plain and simple.

Nope, not all. Some are perfectly fine leaving them alone. But considering this happened during the Bush Admin, who when he was governor actively fought against the repeal of the law that many homosexual conduct illegal, it seems odd. He's willing to hire the guy, but when governor was totally fine having him thrown in jail for living his life. So yeah, it fucking matters.


You're going to compare gangs to the government? That's a pretty apt comparison in America's case right now. Congratulations.

But in this case, shitting on a conservative who has actively fought against homosexual rights in your country and exploiting one for his own end is pretty gross to me. But hey, maybe exploiting people is alright with you. (see how silly I sound when I put words in your mouth?)

That hasn't been the case in decades. They're for less government when it suits them. Which normally encompasses guns, not providing social services, and allowing companies to exploit workers. They have no problem supporting more government when it comes to same sex marriage, abortion, try to teach creationism in science, trying to stop stem-cell research, or anything else they can remotely connect to Jesus.


Your mistake is thinking that I personally care about his job and being gay. It doesn't have anything to do with reporter for me. My problem is the Bush had no problem with this guys mere existence in his state being criminalized, while simultaneously having no problem using him for his own promotion.

A gay person can be as conservative as they want, sexual orientation has no bearing in my mind on political affiliation.

Nope, not all. Some are perfectly fine leaving them alone. But considering this happened during the Bush Admin, who when he was governor actively fought against the repeal of the law that many homosexual conduct illegal, it seems odd. He's willing to hire the guy, but when governor was totally fine having him thrown in jail for living his life. So yeah, it fucking matters.


You're going to compare gangs to the government? That's a pretty apt comparison in America's case right now. Congratulations.

But in this case, shitting on a conservative who has actively fought against homosexual rights in your country and exploiting one for his own end is pretty gross to me. But hey, maybe exploiting people is alright with you. (see how silly I sound when I put words in your mouth?)

That hasn't been the case in decades. They're for less government when it suits them. Which normally encompasses guns, not providing social services, and allowing companies to exploit workers. They have no problem supporting more government when it comes to same sex marriage, abortion, try to teach creationism in science, trying to stop stem-cell research, or anything else they can remotely connect to Jesus.


Your mistake is thinking that I personally care about his job and being gay. It doesn't have anything to do with reporter for me. My problem is the Bush had no problem with this guys mere existence in his state being criminalized, while simultaneously having no problem using him for his own promotion.

A gay person can be as conservative as they want, sexual orientation has no bearing in my mind on political affiliation.
Tell yourself whatever helps you sleep better at night. You have not shown me any proof that this "reporter" was hurting gays. Outing people that do not wish to be out is bullying. Plain and fucking simple. There is no other way to describe it. Gays who get outed against their will have one of the highest suicide rates of any group in the U.S. If they wish to come out, that is their choice and their's alone to make. You do not get to destroy someone's life simply because you disagree with their politics.

You seem to have an issue with putting words in my mouth. I didn't sway the report was hurting gays, I said Bush was. I didn't say I was okay with him being outed. Perhaps you should read what I wrote again.