Misinformation Issues


PREMO Member

It’s Now Clear How Misinformed The Public Has Been About The Risks Of COVID-19

Even as the pandemic raged on, and more information became available which should have made the public more informed, more recent surveys found Americans were still dramatically off in their risk assessment. A September 2021 survey from Rasmussen Reports asked Americans what they believed the mortality rate was from COVID-19.

The real number is hard to precisely pin down, but estimates are under 2%. But 17% of Americans said it was 5% or higher, and 19% said it was 10% or higher.

Interestingly, Rasmussen found that Americans who don’t watch cable news at all were more likely to peg the correct death rate than those who watch CNN, MSNBC or Fox News.

It’s no wonder why Americans are continually overstating the risk of the pandemic. A study published near the end of 2020 found that American media’s coverage of COVID-19 skewed dramatically more negative than that of other countries. Ninety-one percent of U.S. media coverage of the pandemic at the time was negative, compared to 54% for international sources and, notably, 65% for scientific journals.


PREMO Member

Vivek Murthy's Demand for Data on COVID 'Misinformation' Is Part of a Creepy Crusade to Suppress Dissent

The surgeon general's definition of misinformation includes statements that are arguably or verifiably true.

All of this is more than a little creepy in a country where people have a constitutional right to express their opinions, even when they are outlandish and ill-founded. It is especially chilling given the administration's highly elastic definition of misinformation, which includes criticism of controversial pronouncements by agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC itself has a long track record of misrepresenting scientific evidence and misleading the public.

"Defining 'misinformation' is a challenging task, and any definition has limitations," Murthy concedes in his advisory. "One key issue is whether there can be an objective benchmark for whether something qualifies as misinformation. Some researchers argue that for something to be considered misinformation, it has to go against 'scientific consensus.' Others consider misinformation to be information that is contrary to the 'best available evidence.' Both approaches recognize that what counts as misinformation can change over time with new evidence and scientific consensus. This Advisory prefers the 'best available evidence' benchmark since claims can be highly misleading and harmful even if the science on an issue isn't yet settled."

If you say something that goes against the "best available evidence" as determined by government officials, in other words, you are spreading "misinformation," which poses such a grave threat that all rational Americans should be united in opposing it. What does that mean in practice?

Murthy's office says "misinformation has caused confusion and led people to decline COVID-19 vaccines, reject public health measures such as masking and physical distancing, and use unproven treatments." It therefore includes skepticism about the value of general masking and criticism of the CDC's recently reversed recommendation that children as young as 2 be forced to wear masks in schools and day care centers, regardless of local COVID-19 trends.


That September, then–CDC Director Robert Redfield declared, surely based on the "best available evidence," that face masks were "the most important, powerful public health tool we have." He averred that masks were more effective as a safeguard against COVID-19 than vaccines would prove to be. If you doubted Redfield's claims, according to Murthy, you were aggravating an "urgent threat to public health."

Last fall, Redfield's successor, Rochelle Walensky, said wearing a mask "reduc[es] your chance of infection by more than 80 percent." Although the CDC was unable to back up that startling claim, Walensky insisted "the evidence is clear." So if you thought otherwise and said so, you were part of the problem that Murthy is determined to tackle.

Last August, in a move that was consistent with Murthy's demands, YouTube suspended Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) for propagating COVID-19 misinformation by saying "most of the masks that you can get over the counter" have "no value." While N95 respirators are effective at curtailing virus transmission, Paul said, commonly used cloth masks are not. Five months later, the CDC largely agreed with Paul, saying "properly fitted respirators provide the highest level of protection," while "loosely woven cloth products provide the least protection." By Murthy's reckoning, the CDC's blessing transformed misinformation into scientifically valid advice.

Last month, the CDC nevertheless claimed a study had shown that wearing a cloth mask "lowered the odds of testing positive" by 56 percent. As the agency acknowledged in a tiny footnote, that result was not statistically significant. And while the associations between infection risk and reported use of surgical masks or N95s were statistically significant, serious methodological problems made the CDC's causal conclusions highly dubious. But if you noted those weaknesses, you were contradicting the CDC, which by Murthy's lights made you a public enemy.

Except many of us knew MASKING Was Bullshit and masking would NOT Stop The Spread

and wtf do doctors know about the Physics of Air Flow


PREMO Member

If the COVID-19 Emergency Is Over, Why Is the Surgeon General Worried About 'Misinformation'?

Yet, the top-down approach from the federal government and the heavy-handed response to information that deviates from its preferred narrative continue. On Thursday, the U.S. surgeon general took unprecedented action. Dr. Vivek Murthy posted a preview of a Request for Information. The final document will get published to the federal register on Friday.

Murthy’s office requests input from interested parties on the impact and prevalence of health misinformation in the digital information environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Essentially it is a call for the Democrats’ allies in Big Tech to pony up data about individuals who disagreed with the ruling regime. The purpose is evident from the goals of the request:

  • Understanding the impact of COVID-19 misinformation on healthcare infrastructure and public health more broadly during the pandemic, including (but not limited to) quality of care, health decisions and outcomes, direct and indirect costs, trust in the healthcare system, providers, and healthcare workers’ morale and safety.
  • Understand the unique role the information environment played in the societal response to the COVID-19 pandemic and implications for future public health emergencies.
  • Understand the impact of exposure to health misinformation and how access to trusted and credible health information, particularly during a public health emergency, impacts lifesaving health decisions such as an individual’s likelihood to vaccinate.
  • Use the information requested to prepare for and respond to future public health crises.

Specifically, it seems Murthy’s office wants to understand the role of social media in disseminating information during the COVID-19 emergency so they can shut down dissent more effectively in the future. It is easy to tell what the goal is by how “misinformation” is defined. According to the request, health misinformation is “health information that is false, inaccurate, or misleading according to the best available evidence at the time.”

It is not clear who decides what the best available evidence is. Some of the studies posted by the CDC and the NIH were horribly constructed and used to implement the administration’s preferred policies. One example is David Zweig’s takedown of CDC Director Rochelle Walensky’s favorite school masking study in The Atlantic. Dr. Antohnoy Fauci’s remdesivir study is another. The research team changed the outcome criteria during the study, and the results have never been replicated. In other words, neither of these studies was the “best available evidence at the time.”

Two other features of this request are of concern. First, it uses the safety of healthcare workers as a predicate for collecting the information. Like so many initiatives in the Biden regime, it assumes disagreement leads to violence. Dissenting doctors and researchers will be the next people the DOJ designates domestic terrorists. Almost as dangerous as parents who oppose radical race and gender curriculum, ruining their careers and reputations with media hits coordinated by the likes of Dr. Fauci was not enough.

Second, the only individual outcome it is specifically concerned with is an individual’s likelihood to vaccinate. Pretty absurd outcome criteria when America is staring at booster number four in slightly over 12 months, and the data on vaccine effectiveness in preventing transmission or symptomatic illness is dismal. One of the most effective programs to reduce hospitalizations during the Delta wave was monoclonal antibody clinics in Florida. The Biden administration vilified Governor Ron DeSantis for starting them even though over 60% of treatment was provided to vaccinated Floridians in some locations.

The deleterious futility of COVID lockdowns is just beginning to emerge. Recently, a Johns Hopkins study estimated that these policies reduced deaths by 0.2% while the physical, social, and educational costs were immense. But governors, doctors, and researchers who objected to those policies were accused of spreading misinformation. Now, they have been proven primarily correct—another case where the “best information at the time” was more than suspect.


PREMO Member

It was false — it was made up by another Never Trumper, Joe Walsh (funny how these guys make up so much stuff). It was such an obvious lie, Politifact had to weigh in and bust it. After being busted on it, Walsh claimed it was a “joke.” Yet, five days later, Kinzinger has still not taken the lie down from his account, despite the fact he has been told — repeatedly — it is false. Talk about disinformation. This is a man who likes to claim that he operates from conscience, when what he operates from is his hot air. Yet, he keeps lying, saying that Tucker Carlson is supporting the war, when Carlson has condemned it.

Kinzinger has also fallen for the ridiculous internet joke about Same Hyde, this time being the “Ghost of Kyiv.” It doesn’t even occur to him not only isn’t it real, but that it would be dangerous to post about it if it were.



PREMO Member

Dem Congressman Says He's Feeling the Pain at the Pump, But He Owns an Electric Car

In November 2021, Levin bragged on Instagram about test-driving a brand new Rivian electric truck, which has a retail price starting at $79,500. In the interest of
providing context, that is about $12,000 more than what the median American household earns in an entire year.

Look, bravo that the congressman can afford such a luxury, but this is the mindset of the limousine liberal. This is the urban-based professional elite: snobby, condescending, and out-of-touch with the real needs of Americans. America needs job creation, economic growth, energy production, and a competent president. Instead, we have lackluster jobs growth, an economy veering towards a recession, rising gas prices, and Joe Biden.


PREMO Member

A Warning From Shanghai

Remember when we were told that China was a model for the world in controlling Covid? Sure, as a totalitarian state, it was able to weld people inside their homes and monitor its citizens via drone. But many in the West believed that such measures were necessary. They argued that the abandonment of personal liberty was an appropriate way to fight a respiratory virus.


According to California Assembly Bill 2098, physicians who deviate from an authorized set of beliefs would do so at risk to their medical license. The bill, written by Assemblyman Evan Low, a Democrat in Silicon Valley, and currently making its way through the California Legislature, is motivated by the idea that practicing doctors are spreading “misinformation” about the risks of Covid, its treatment, and the Covid vaccine. It declares that physicians and surgeons who “disseminate or promote misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines” shall be subject to “disciplinary action,” which could result in the loss of the doctor’s medical license.

The language of the bill itself is intentionally vague about what constitutes “misinformation,” which makes it even more damaging. Doctors, fearing loss of their livelihoods, will need to hew closely to the government line on Covid science and policy, even if that line does not track the scientific evidence. After all, until recently, top government science bureaucrats like Dr. Fauci claimed that the idea that Covid came from a Wuhan laboratory was a conspiracy theory, rather than a valid hypothesis that should be open to discussion. The government’s track record on discerning Covid truths is poor.

The bill claims that the spread of misinformation by physicians about the Covid vaccines “has weakened public confidence and placed lives at serious risk.” But how significant is this problem in reality? Over 83% of Californians over the age of 50 are fully vaccinated (including the booster).


PREMO Member


PREMO Member
What is that narrative? The United States was never a great country. It was built by slaves and other oppressed people. It was flawed from its inception. Our country's iconic heroes such as Washington, Jackson, Jefferson, and others should be cast down because they owned slaves. Capitalism is a system of racial and social oppression that, by its nature, makes it corrupt and evil. There is no American dream. To the Progressives, America is so deeply corrupted that it must be changed from the ground up — starting with the history of the nation.

George Orwell wrote, "Who controls the past controls the future." The far left has adopted this mantra and is running with it. Leftists intend to reboot the United States. Our history, our true history, stands in the way of that. So do our American values, our love of country, and the moral center that our religions provide.

On the historical front, their solution is eloquent and dangerous: change the history as the basis for forging a new Progressive future. This is not just about rewriting history books. They will alter our money, removing the "undesirable" presidents and replacing them with approved Progressive icons. Monuments are already toppling and have been for years. It is easy to imagine the left demanding that the Washington monument be renamed, or that the Lincoln Memorial be replaced with something they deem more socially and politically acceptable. To underestimate how far they are willing to go is a mistake we cannot afford.

Our nation is not perfect. We have flaws, but we constantly strive to overcome them. Our leaders are far from being saints. In my lifetime, race relations are better than they have ever been. Some business people are corrupt, but our economic system has given millions the opportunity for a better life. We are one of the best nations to live on the Earth. We have fought wars around the globe to liberate oppressed people. We are a nation where anyone can become whatever he desires...if he puts the effort into it. We are prosperous, hardworking, and a deeply convicted people. The American glass is not half-empty; it is almost full. Yes, things could be better, and we are willing to undertake that work.



PREMO Member

Free Speech or Criminal Conduct? The Key Factor in the DOJ’s Case Against Trump

Donald Trump, Department Of Justice, Trump Indictment, Joe Biden, Free Speech, First Amendment, January 6, Capitol Chaos, 2020 Election

AllSides Summary​

A key component of the Department of Justice’s second indictment of former President Donald Trump is that he spread “knowingly false claims” following the 2020 election. If Trump believes he won the election, he could argue his actions are protected under the First Amendment.
Alan Dershowitz, a constitutional lawyer who previously defended Trump, told Newsweek (Center bias) that Trump could successfully argue his actions are protected under the First Amendment “unless the government can prove beyond reasonable doubt that he actually knew and believed he had lost fairly.”

Criminal Actions? The New York Times Opinion (Left bias) editorial board wrote, “Demonstrating Mr. Trump’s knowledge that he was lying will be central to the prosecution’s case when it comes to trial, because Mr. Smith wants to make clear that Mr. Trump wasn’t genuinely trying to root out credible instances of voter fraud.” The board drew a distinction between Trump’s words and Trump’s actions, arguing, “As much as defense lawyers are trying to frame the case as an attack on Mr. Trump’s free speech, the indictment makes clear that it was his actions after Election Day that were criminal.”

Impeachment Do-Over? The National Review (Right bias) editorial board argued the indictment seeks to “criminalize protected political speech” and “shouldn’t stand.” The board determined, “Mendacious rhetoric in seeking to retain political office is damnable — and, again, impeachable — but it’s not criminal fraud” and that the “Biden Justice Department is attempting to use the criminal process as a do-over for a failed impeachment.”


PREMO Member

This is more than a 'cause for concern', it's straight up gaslighting and propaganda.

And yet one anomalous price from one store in Idaho 11 months ago was ripping through people’s social media feeds as if it explained the entire economy. One Democratic official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations, said: “What are we supposed to do, tell the president or Chuck Schumer to send a tweet saying, ‘Hey, most Big Macs aren’t that expensive?’ It would look ridiculous.” A spokesperson from McDonald’s did not return a request for comment.
The Big Mac conundrum reflects what Biden aides and senior Democratic officials regard as one of their most vexing challenges ahead of the 2024 presidential election. Even as inflation has fallen to a manageable 3 percent, and although the labor market has remained hot amid strong growth, voters still don’t like the economy, and they blame the president.
Inflation eased in October in latest sign of cooling economy
Overcoming this discontent — and understanding what is driving it — has become a central priority of the White House and Democratic lawmakers, leading to a fierce debate among economists, pollsters and other experts.



PREMO Member
🔥 It’s happening again! They just can’t help themselves. The latest round of U.S. government censorship and propaganda — for your own good! — started eleven months ago, with a random, 14-second TikTok with some guy in Idaho marveling over his $16 McDonald’s quarter-pounder with cheese, large fry, and a Sprite.

Here’s his receipt, from the linked clip:


Last Friday, the Washington Post excreted its latest unappetizing piece of journalistic propaganda headlined, “The viral $16 McDonald’s meal that may explain voter anger at Biden.” The more ominous sub-headline warned: “As some Democrats fear social media is exaggerating economic problems, the White House faces a crucial choice on election strategy.”

Get it? Social media is exaggerating economic problems. In other words, it’s MISINFORMATION. Just. Like. Covid.

WaPo’s article was penned by pandemic keyboard warriors Jeff Stein and Taylor Lorenz. Lorenz’s name might sound familiar. She’s the single, late-40’s reporter who doxxed Libs of TikTok founder Chaya Raichik. Anyway, on Friday the two laptop-class WaPo reporters doxxed their latest victim, the guy who posted the McDonald’s receipt clip: an Idaho HVAC repairman named Topher Olive.

Apparently Topher Olive is a misinformer, if not an outright liar, since according to The Washington Post, in his 14-second clip he failed to explain he’d bought one of McDonald’s seasonal burgers — the “Smokey BLT” — and obviously the HVAC installer should’ve expected his otherwise plain fast-food burger to cost $16.

Looks delicious, doesn’t it?

image 2.png

The real problem is that, over the last couple weeks, Topher’s pricey burger clip sizzled onto social media like a cheap, Chinese frozen meat™ product hitting a rusty greased skillet. And not in a good way. Topher’s video clip has usually been re-packaged as an unhappy meal with a large side of scathing criticism of Joe Biden’s economic policies. And Joe doesn’t like it.

Fortunately your diligent federal government never sleeps, and it owns newspapers like the Washington Post, so it can promptly take the fight to liars like Topher Olive, who is probably working with the Russians. Still, it’s a vexing problem:

These stories soon reached the White House Office of Digital Strategy, which tracked the meme as one of many exaggerated examples of the nation’s economic woes, according to a White House official. In reality, inflation has been steadily subsiding.

And yet one anomalous price from one store in Idaho 11 months ago was ripping through people’s social media feeds as if it explained the entire economy. One Democratic official said: “What are we supposed to do, tell the president or Chuck Schumer to send a tweet saying, ‘Hey, most Big Macs aren’t that expensive?’ It would look ridiculous.”

Lest you forget, the White House Office of Digital Strategy is the federal government’s online misinformation police. It’s not political though! Because that would be wrong. But of course, anything that hurts the president also hurts the country.

So what should a good, massively-funded federal government do about a problem like Topher Olive? It should combat misinformation, of course. But it turned out this problem is especially tricky, like a paper bag of extra ketchup packets with a leaky one. Democrat political operatives just aren’t sure what to do, exactly, about all the unhappy regular folks who’ve been deluded into posting all this economic misinformation, probably by Putin himself:

Some voters regard the suggestion that they simply do not appreciate their circumstances as elitist and condescending. (But) at the center of this debate is a dispute over what extent social media and perceptions — rather than real conditions in the economy — are fueling voters’ angst. TikTok abounds with misleading or inaccurate information about the economy. One video in September with 2.3 million views said there was a “SILENT DEPRESSION.”

Another video from this summer with 2.1 million views claimed, incorrectly, “We have the lowest purchasing power we have ever had in American history,” and asserted that inflation-adjusted wages are lower than they were then. A third video, with 1.8 million views, similarly falsely claimed, “We currently are making less than the height of the Great Depression.”

Can you believe all these misinformers are still running around, free as birds, polluting social media with their dangerous wrongthink about the economy? How serious is this problem for Joe Biden, sorry, I mean for America? Very serious:

Some economists think these kinds of comments are not just wrong but dangerous. Economists fear that these exaggerated stories will ultimately lead to a worse outcome — perhaps helping Trump win reelection — and that it is vital to make clear that this remains by many measures one of the best recoveries in modern U.S. history.

Dangerous! You know what happens to dangerous people, like folks who take unauthorized U.S. Capitol tours. And, the WaPo is fretting that this 14-second TikTok about pricey McDonald’s meals might result in the worst outcome of all, at least, according to WaPo’s economists: they might help Trump get re-elected. So stop it!

In the meantime, the White House is diligently using your tax dollars to bribe Facebook to clamp down on all this negativity. And it’s hiring social media influencers to hype the economy. Not to help Biden. To help America:

The White House official said the administration is working with TikTok creators to tell positive stories of Biden’s economic stewardship, while also working with social media platforms to counter misinformation.

It’s so handy that during the pandemic they created all these software tools to help social media companies “counter misinformation,” which is a very nifty euphemism for “shut you fools up.”

The truth is that Biden’s “economic stewardship” — if you can call it that — has not made the economy better. Only a sold-out laptop-class reporter who lives off doing the bidding of shady government intelligence operatives could say that. The federal government is just jimmying the data again, to make it look like there’s less inflation, a game it has been playing since the 1970’s.

Even Taylor Lorenz couldn’t let that whopper languish under the warmer, admitting in her story that, to be honest, real wages have plunged since Biden was elected. They’ve plunged a lot:

image 3.png

If the article’s readers trudge through to the very bottom, they find the two quotes that should have started the article, instead of quotes from anonymous White House officials. As it turns out, Lorenz called two actual TikTok influencers, to ask them about their perspective on the reality of Biden’s economy. In other words, the very people the article is about.

But you can see why Taylor buried these quotes at the very end — they both destroyed the story’s carefully-crafted ‘misinformation’ narrative:

“There’s this cadre of number-crunching paperwork obsessives who are convinced that if some report says inflation is slowing, that means everything is great and everybody who feels something different is either lying or brainwashed by TikTok,” said Jordan Uhl, a content creator and progressive activist. “The idea that people are just making this up or are misled about their own material conditions is absurd.”

Zaid Admani, a content creator with nearly 400,000 followers who posts about finance and economic topics, said that people are increasingly learning about financial concepts on TikTok — but that many have a very negative view of the country’s economic outlook. “People feel a sense of dread,” he said.

I imagine the “sense of dread” Zaid mentioned is like that feeling you get whenever you see Joe Biden about to give an important speech at the podium, and then he gets that vacant, confused look, like he’s running out of things to say, and starts swaying toward stage left. Imagine having that feeling all the time.

No wonder they are so mad about TikTok all the time.

Last edited:


PREMO Member

New Report Reveals Biden Admin Pressured YouTube To 'Crack Down On Vaccine Misinformation'

In April 2021, President Joe Biden's former Director of Digital Strategy, Robert Flaherty, emailed Google team members to "connect […] about the work you're doing to combat vaccine hesitancy, but also crack down on vaccine misinformation."


An internal email from YouTube revealed a "high degree of interest" coming from the White House regarding vaccine misinformation and hesitancy.

"Unfortunately, the role of tech in addressing vaccine hesitancy is about to come under a massive spotlight, particularly as the supply of the vaccine is soon to outpace demand," the email continued. "The White House is very interested in our work on borderline content, and more specifically vaccine-related content as well as our work to promote authoritative sources for vaccines."

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) told FOX Business that they knew the White House was working closely with Big Tech to censor the First Amendment and that "internal documents from Google obtained by the Judiciary Committee and Select Subcommittee show that their scheme extended to YouTube."