Renée Redux: The DiResta Deception
A video comment drags me back deeper into someone I touched on in my piece on Samuel the Bankman Fried
Last week I experienced another blast from the past, and the same one that I experienced last month when I looked into L'affaire Bankman Fried, triggered by the mention of his (and her) history at the Wall St. firm Jane Street. That was about Renee DiResta, a notable player in the Jewish fantasy that was Russiagate, which in turn has now turned into the (gentile) nightmare of the war in Ukraine. So I included her story in that piece, including a video link to her March 2019 appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience.
Last week while resuscitating my videowork on Bitchute I noticed a comment under one vid that provided a link to a Youtube channel called Leather Apron Club, and a video claiming to debunk high Ashkenazi average IQ (generally said to be 107-115), I believe as a response to something I’d said about Jewish eugenics, which I also raised in my review here of the Burns Holopropadoc. That vid was a follow-up to an earlier vid this guy did on the disproportionate number of Jewish guests on the Rogan podcast, where he says 42% of the political guests on the podcast have been Jewish. In calculating that he’d categorized all the guests on a basic level (comedians, MMA fighters, etc.) and then on their ethnicity. For Jews he required some sort of verification, which might have come from their wiki, a comment they’d made on twitter, that kind of thing. Here is the spreadsheet he links that details all of that: Joe Rogan Guests - Google Sheets
My first thought when I looked at this spreadsheet was to check on the categorization of Renee DiResta, and there she is under podcast #1263 - W for white, not J for Jew, and nothing in the comment space. (A few lines down he addresses comedian Andrew Schulz, who is a W, and adds the comment, “Says white, looks extremely jewey”.) I thought of her because I have never been able to find any concrete verification of her “Jeweyness” online, although everything in her story convinces me that she is in fact Jewish - beyond the obvious:
Now, I am not at all surprised by the number he calculated, and in large part because of the Rogan role in the Intellectual Dark Web that was all the rage a few years ago, reaching its peak trending with the notorious Jewish neocon Bari Weiss 2018 article in the NY Times which featured this series of photos of some of the main associates (which I included in that Bankman Fried piece):
Sam Harris is highlighted there because he was DiResta’s route to uber-popular JRE - she appeared on his podcast in January 2019, he appeared on JRE in February 2019, and she appeared on JRE in March 2019; at the beginning of that video I linked Joe says he listened to her on that Harris podcast, which one has to assume Harris suggested he do when he was there.
I have refered to the IDW as the visible heart of the cultural neoconservative movement, which I define as the effort to create a new Jewish socio-political center sitting on top of the three critical Jewish socio-political philosophies that have arisen over the last half-century to be universally embraced within the mainstream/establishment in this century - neoliberal economics, neoconservative foreign policy, and cultural Marxism as essentially domestic policy. The basic mission of the IDW, with its Jewish beating heart, appeared to be to cement all of these while trimming off each’s individual excesses. So, for instance, neo-atheist Harris (as per usual, “neo” meaning “Jew”) is all in on feminism, gay liberation, etc., but pushes back on aspects of transsexual normalization, the endless propagation of genders, certain aspects of the BLM mythologizing and Defund the Police, and of course defense of Islam… or Islamicism more correctly? Where he gets really slippery is on Israel.
Btw, in one of the pieces on DiResta I came across in the process of writing this she said as a joke she views herself as a centrist which makes her seem far right in the Bay Area. I think what she really is is a neo-centist like Harris & Co. (as per usual, “neo” meaning “Jew”).
You can see why goys Rogan and Jordan Peterson were lured into this cabal simply by looking at their Youtube subscriber counts - Rogan at 13M, Peterson at 6M, Ben Shapiro easily the top Jewish member at 5.8M, Dave Rubin at 1.8M, Harris at just over 500k, Brett Weinstein at just over 400k, Eric Weinstein (who named the IDW) at a hair under 300k. Not only do they get exposure on these more popular channels but they also create a universe of other guests appearing there. There’s no question in my mind that if LAC created the same sort of spreadsheet on the Harris podcast the majority and likely the overwhelming majority of his political guests would turn out to be Jewish - it's a fucking Jewfest over there in Sammyland. Another IDW-like Jewish podcaster whose photo appears in LAC’s vid is Lex Fridman, who has 2.3M subscribers; a vid of his with guest Kanye West was also linked at the end of my Bankman Fried piece, showing his work in imposing Jewish crypsis, trying to convince Ye that a good person simply doesn’t talk about Jews, rather just ethnically-unlabeled individuals.
So I ended up doing a series of videos this past weekend coming out of those LAC videos, ending up again on the subject of DiResta. Ultimately the aspects of her as a public figure that stand out to me in her activism came down to two things - deception and crypsis. Crypsis is a kind of deception of course, but it is affected through what one doesn’t say rather than what one does, although DiResta’s deceptions generally seem to have that same aspect.
But one thing kept bothering me about this - I couldn’t find the article I saw a few years ago when I first looked into her after listening to the Harris podcast, and that was a piece which confirmed her having written her college thesis on propaganda used in the 2004 Russian election. This is what I have considered to be her baseline deception, telling her story of how she got involved to researching the Russian manipulation of the 2016 US election using trolls and bots on social media platforms on the internet without ever mentioning that foundational piece. Instead she always starts her story in 2013 as a future mother concerned about childhood vaccines in schools and the anti-vaxx narrative on the web.
So after doing those videos I kept looking, and then I at least found an article which cites this in her bio, even if it isn’t the article which I saw back in 2019. And it appears in the NY Times, which keeps showing up in this matter overall. The article is titled “She Warned of Peer-to-Peer Misinformation’ Congress Listened”, it was published on Nov. 12 2017, and was written by Sheera Frenkel, who is most assuredly Jewish (she also spent a decade before that reporting on the wars in the middle east for various MSM platforms). The “smoking gun” appears about halfway through the article in this paragraph:
“A graduate of Stony Brook University in New York, Ms. DiResta wrote her college thesis on propaganda in the 2004 Russian elections. She then spent seven years on Wall Street as a trader, watching the slow introduction of automation into the market. She recalled the initial fear of overreliance on algorithms, as there were ‘bad actors who could come in and manipulate the system into making bad trades’.”
Stony Brook is part of the SUNY system and is located out on Long Island; the seven years on Wall St. were with Jane Street. The article goes on to complete her bio to where she usually starts the story post-Russiagating:
“Ms. DiResta moved to San Francisco in 2011 for a job with the O’Reilly Alpha Tech Venture Capital firm. But it wasn’t until the birth of her first child a few years later, that Ms. DiResta started to examine the dark side of social media.”
As a picture-filler and comparison, this is how she describes her background on her webpage, reneediresta.com:
“Previously, Renée was the Director of Research at Yonder. She was part of the founding team and ran marketing and business development at Haven, the transportation management technology platform that’s transforming trade logistics for commodity, CPG, and food shippers. Before that, Renée was a Principal at seed-stage venture capital fund O’Reilly AlphaTech Ventures (OATV), where she invested in early technology startups with a focus on hardware, manufacturing, and logistics companies. She spent seven years on Wall Street as an equity derivatives trader and market maker at Jane Street, a top quantitative proprietary trading firm in New York City.
“Renée has degrees in Computer Science and Political Science from the Honors College at SUNY Stony Brook. She is an Emerson Fellow, a 2018-2019 Mozilla Fellow, a 2017 Presidential Leadership Scholar, a Council on Foreign Relations term member, and a Truman National Security Fellow. She is a Harvard Berkman-Klein Center affiliate, and is a Founding Advisor to the Center for Humane Technology, and was previously a Staff Associate at the Columbia University Data Science Institute. She is passionate about STEM education and childhood immunization advocacy, and is one of the co-founders of parent advocacy organization Vaccinate California. For fun, she explores data sets and loves cooking and making things. Renée and her husband, Justin Hileman, are the parents of three feisty little people.”
Hileman “makes the internet” and “love[s] working with cool people to make cool things”; here is the happy couple sans their little people apparently crashing a trendy e-lite party; Renee is reaching for your ballsack (or titty for the ladies out there):
One might assume that the NY Times piece left out the equity derivatives bit on her trader history because such instruments ended up with kind of a bad name after 2008. Yonder is the former New Knowledge, which ended up with kind of a bad name after 2018 when the NY Times (and others) busted it for fabricating and inserting onto Facebook/Twitter fake bots related to the Alabama senate special election, but favoring the Dem candidate, which I will get to later.
But there's nothing on DiResta’s webpage regarding her college thesis, nor does the Times piece tie this to anything, rather it’s just a free-floating factoid thrown in. My best guess is that it wasn’t from DiResta directly in the interview, rather it was sourced by the author from some other piece, and perhaps from the pre-Russiagate article I saw back in 2019 (which I think might have been linked on her webpage; if so, it isn’t now).
So let’s look more closely at that one seemingly-innocuous sentence - “Ms. DiResta wrote her college thesis on propaganda in the 2004 Russian elections”. There are three important things there: “propaganda”, “2004”, and “Russian”.
First, 2004 - the year of the election, and since DiResta spent seven years on Wall St. before moving to that silicon valley venture capital operation in 2011, that leaves a very narrow window for doing the thesis, likely late 2004 to early 2005.
Second, propaganda. DiResta helps us immensely here, since she herself has defined that for us, in a piece on the Yale Review titled “Computational Propaganda - Public relations in a high-tech age”, which starts with this:
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions.
—EDWARD BERNAYS, ‘Propaganda’
“THE PIONEERING PUBLIC RELATIONS CONSULTANT EDWARD BERNAYS’S words are nearly a century old, but today, in an era of rampant misinformation and insidious disinformation campaigns online, they seem startlingly apt. The rulers Bernays was talking about were public relations specialists, and at the time propaganda was not a pejorative. But when we consider this statement in the context of the current information ecosystem, replete with manipulative narratives spread by bots and human operators alike, it’s somewhat jarring. Now the ‘invisible rulers’ are the people who control the algorithms that populate the feeds of two billion users, and the strategists who are most adept at gaming them.
“In Bernays’s time, propaganda was used somewhat interchangeably with public relations. The concept has evolved since then; modern and postwar propaganda can perhaps be defined in the simplest terms as information with an agenda. The information is not objective, but it also isn’t necessarily false—in fact, to be most effective, propaganda is often anchored in a partial truth. Regardless of whether it’s true or false, propaganda has a consistent aim: to influence the target to feel a certain way or form a certain opinion about a concept or entity. Propaganda is most often associated with governments, but activist groups, companies, and the media also produce it.
“Propaganda has been a tool of rulers since the time of the ancient Greeks and Romans; the term itself comes from an administrative body of the Catholic Church that was dedicated to ‘propagating’ the Catholic faith in non-Catholic countries.”
My first thought when I read this was about the butchering of the rule I learned about possessives - just an apostrophe after words ending in “S”. But now I find that this rule only applies to plurals ending in “S”; other nouns ending in “S” aren’t quite so clear. Learn something new every day…
That aside, this intro to the article starts with Bernays, the Father of Public Relations or Propaganda a century ago, and the nephew (twice over) of Sigmund Freud, whose psycho-analysis was perhaps the biggest scientific fraud of the 20th century but one of the critical players in the development of cultural Marxism, which was a kind of combination of Freudianism and Marxism. Oh, and he was Jewish, as were all the leading figures in the Frankfurt School which brought cultural Marxism (the philosophical foundation of ‘60s-’70s New Leftism) to the US.
And it ends with a kind of shot at the long-hated Catholic Church. So who are the “invisible rulers” in the US today? More to the point, who were they in Russia in 2000 when Putin became president and not so long before DiResta decided on the topic of that thesis? Surely not who she wrote about in the thesis, which with absolute certainty focused on Putin and his allies/supporters.
Which gets me to the third, Russia. To provide a picture of Russia at the time of her interest, let’s look at a piece of media on the rise and fall of the original Russian oligarchs as presented on the Canadian TV show Human Edge, I believe done in 2005. First, the lead-up to the 1996 election when the leading oligarchs formed the semibankirshchina alliance to support the reelection of Putin against the communist challenge:
The semibankirshchina (seven bankers) were composed of six Jews and one goy, as I detailed in my first piece here on Jeffrey Sachs. [Please read it, it presents critical aspects to this story and explains what has led us to the war in Ukraine.] This film focuses on five people besides Yeltsin and eventually Putin, four oligarchs (Berezovsky, Gusinsky, Khodorkovsky - all semibankirschchina - and Chernoy/Cherney) and Anatoly Chubais, who was Yeltsin’s economic czar and largely responsible for the imposition of Sachs and the Harvard Boys’ shock treatment privatization earlier in the ‘90s.
All five of these people are Jewish, a word that is never used in this film of more than an hour and a half. If you have a keen eye you also saw in this the current “Russian” (Jewish) billionaire oligarchs young Roman Abramovich (Berezovsky’s protege), Mikhail Fridman (also one of the semibankirshchina and born/raised in Ukraine) and Petr Aven (closely connected to Fridman and Alfa Bank, and included on some lists of the semibankishchina), who have gotten caught up and in between in the Ukraine war business. Also ask yourself why DiResta decided not to write the real story about propaganda in and around that 1996 election.
Near the end we get to Putin and the Khodorkovsky challenge in this century:
Also note that the chess champion Garry Kasparov shown at the end is a Jew closely linked to Khodorkovsky. So this is the horribly biased (note also that the filmmaker Alexander Gentelev was a Soviet Jew who fled to Israel in the early '90s) picture of Russian politics that we had at the time of DiResta’s decision to do her thesis featuring the 2004 Putin re-election run. DiResta, the presumed-Jew with presumed skin in the game, with a dog in the fight as Mel Gibson so succinctly put it. (And let’s not forget that scumbag Wall St. Jewish financier Bill Browder, the largest foreign “investor” in Russia in 2005 when his Russian visa was pulled and he was also charged with tax evasion and fraud.)
As the 2007 Guardian article on the oligarchs I quoted in that Sachs piece said (after being mostly politically-corrected),
“All this changed when Putin became president in 2000. Putin's previous employer was the KGB - a notorious Slavs-only club. Since he took power, most of the original Jewish oligarchs have fled. But this probably has more to do with their failure to observe the new rules in Putin's Russia than their religion. During his time in office, Putin - who is due to step down next year - has established a new law: leave politics to the Kremlin. Or else.”
[Btw, in the film Gusinsky and Chernoy are interviewed in Israel and Berezovsky in London (there under an Israeli passport as I have read), where Browder already had redomiciled after giving up his US citizenship to avoid paying US taxes on his loot accumulating offshore, and where Khodorkovsky would ultimately domicile after he got out of prison and made an extended stop to check on his loot in Switzerland. Berezovsky died there under suspicious circumstances (death by hanging) in 2013.]
But Putin won again in 2004, and the rest is history. So what does this tell us about DiResta’s actual motivation when she joined New Knowledge years later in 2017 to work up the Russiagate project? Why has she seemingly dropped this from her elevator speech story? Is this generic deception or specifically crypsis, or both? Why do we not know for a certainty if this important (in the context of Russiagate anyway) “Jewey” public activist figure is Jewish or not?
The more specific deception involving DiResta relates to New Knowledge getting caught with their fingers in the cookie jar in that 2017 Alabama special election, which happened in December of 2018 but was not addressed at all in her appearances on Harris’s (see, I can adapt!) or Rogan’s podcasts in January and March of 2019, or since then by either to my knowledge. DiResta continues to link those two podcasts on her webpage.
Most of the available material on that focuses on Jonathon Morgan, the then-CEO of then-NK, whose Facebook account was suspended resulting from his getting outed by the NY Times in Dec. 2018.
First, let’s look at NK/Yonder, from its wiki (Morgan himself hasn't earned wiki status, unlike DiResta):
“Yonder, formerly named New Knowledge, is a company from Austin, Texas, that specializes in information integrity. It is most widely known for supporting the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in its investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election. The company was also reportedly involved in a messaging operation during the 2017 US Senate special election in Alabama, though the company denied any political motivation behind its research. More recently, Yonder's CEO and researchers have provided expert commentary to the New York Times, Fast Company, and Axios about 5G and COVID-19 misinformation.”
And more on the Alabama business:
“The company prepared ‘The Tactics and Tropes of the Internet Research Agency’ for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
“Two days after this report was published, a New York Times published an article alleging the company's participation in an experiment in the 2017 Senate special election in Alabama. Renée DiResta, one of the principal authors of the Senate report on the Internet Research Agency, said that as she understood it the goal of the New Knowledge research was to investigate how Facebook's content curation algorithms rewarded ‘sensational news.’ Facebook responded by suspending the personal accounts of Morgan and four others.
“Democratic donor Reid Hoffman donated $750,000 to American Emergent Technologies which provided funding for New Knowledge. He disavowed any specific knowledge of the project.”
Fairly generous, that. I included the Hoffman bit because he was/is a rabid dog anti-Trumper and became a major donor to the Dems related to that. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is important because it is important to the Jews, as evidenced by who the leading figures have been on the Dem side - Dianne Feinstein was the chair of the SSCI from 2009 to 2015 when the Dems lost the Senate; today she’s #2 on the Dem side and co-ethnic Ron Wyden is #3. She as ranking member also invited co-ethnic scumbag Browder to testify in front of the committee in 2017 to spew his lies as a “Putin expert”. The chair today is VA Dem Mark Warner, who was from Connecticut, which has had more than its share of Jewish Dem senators in recent times - Abraham Ribicoff, Joe Lieberman, Richard Blumenthal (CT is only about 3.3% Jewish). When in college in DC Warner worked in Ribicoff’s senate office, and he also worked for Rep. Chris Dodd (not Jewish) who became a CT Senator, following in his footsteps of his father Sen. Thomas Dodd, who perhaps is best known for this photo:
That’s him at the Nuremberg trials after WWII where he was a prosecutor, holding one of the infamous Buchenwald shrunken heads. You can see that prop head on the display table in another photo included in my review of the Burns Holopropadoc, showing the layering of propaganda op upon propaganda op.
Also, Warner’s pre-congress career was in venture capital. So I think we can safely guess that Warner has been thoroughly Judaized, essentially a goy frontman, like Rogan. And remember that the Jew Chuck Schumer has run the Dem side of the Senate since 2016; his election to that position was the Dem’s first tangible reaction to the election of Trump, showing a kind of doubling down, as Harris would say. On the House side, the Jew Adam Schiff has been the chair of its intelligence committee and was clearly the leading Russiagater in congress during the Trump presidency.
Back to the Alabama scandal - it appears Morgan tried to take personal responsibility initially, distancing it from the company, at the same he was downplaying what he’d actually done. Here is a reflection of this:
“Morgan admitted to the Washington Post on Tuesday that he created a Facebook page in 2017 with the intention to mimic the Russian’s tactics and see how they could be deployed in the Alabama Senate race. Morgan also said he spent less than $10 on retweets to test the tactics on Twitter. ‘This was like an, ‘Is it possible,’ small-scale, almost like a thought experiment,’ he told the Post. ‘Is it as easy as it might seem?’ Morgan conducted the ‘experiment,’ he stressed, on his own time, and not as the CEO of New Knowledge. He had no intention of disrupting the Alabama race, which Doug Jones, a Democrat, won by a slim margin.”
But that line didn’t hold and New Knowledge - and DiResta - were forced to own it, at least to some degree.
So what are the broader issues here? As far as I can determine, NK was formed in 2014, DiResta likely arrived as Director of Research in 2017 (she first connected with Morgan in 2015 related to ISIS propagandizing on the web), that also was the year that they got involved in digging deeply into the social media side of the Russiagate allegations, and they played a critical role in providing the evidence for this aspect of the manipulation, including to the government investigators (like Schiff and Feinstein). Did they fabricate and plant the evidence as they did in Alabama that year? I doubt it, rather more likely they found things that they could sell as evidence and exaggerated the impact of that, which is a core aspect of this whole operation, kind of like exaggeration of police murderous racism against blacks in the BLM narrative based on a relative handful of incidents.
The Alabama story gets played as Democratic Party corruption though, just as the Bankman Fried story gets played the same way today - when I went to look at IDWer neo-libertarian (as per usual, “neo” meaning “Jew”) Dave Rubin’s YT channel I saw he’d just done a podcast including his take on that, which was all about attacking the Dems as corrupted by generic big money from a generic financial criminal. But this isn’t about more generic Democrat-Republican mudslinging, it’s about the Jewish deep state war on Donald Trump, the Jews being the owners of the Democratic Party, and generic party politics largely operates as a cover for that.
And getting back to my view of the two-pronged motivations for Jewish activism, doing something good for the Chosen (tikkun olam) and making a bundle in the process, NK was rewarded in 2018 with capital investment, and today under a new name continues their good work on “information integrity”.
But DiResta has moved on after earning her bag and further making her name, including to The Atlantic magazine, where she has been a contributing writer since early 2020. The Atlantic has basically been a Jewish rag since it was acquired by Mort Zuckerman in 1980, and the editor-in-chief is Jeffrey Goldberg, who has worked there since 2007; from his wiki:
“Goldberg is Jewish and was born in Brooklyn, New York, the son of Ellen and Daniel Goldberg, whom he describes as ‘very left-wing.’ He grew up in suburban Malverne on Long Island, where he recalled being one of the few Jews in a largely Irish-American area. Retroactively, when describing his first trip to Israel as a teen, Goldberg recalled his youth being among pugnacious youth of a different ethnicity. He found the Jewish empowerment embodied by Israeli soldiers exciting, ‘So, I became deeply enamored of Israel because of that’.’’
*Sigh* One of the best examples of this “ethnic predisposition” is Harris' Making Sense podcast from early this year titled “The Future of American Democracy - a Conversation with Anne Applebaum, David Frum, Barton Gellman, and George Packer”, which of course is all about the continuing threat of the Trumpster. Frum is a senior editor at the Atlantic, and Applebaum, Gellman and Packer are staff writers there; they are all Jews and Frum and Applebaum rather notorious neocons, Applebaum the wife of Radosław Sikorski, the former Defense Minister and Foreign Minister of Poland and very much a player in the politics of the Ukrainian proxywar, and Frum was a speechwriter for Bush the Lesser before Dave the Kosher Canuck even became a dual-loyalty American, is credited with coining the phrase “axis of evil”, and has been called “an uncompromising supporter of Israel”. But nowhere in this discussion or its presentation are all these people identified as Jews; the closest Sam gets in his intro when he says Frum is “a former director of the Republican Jewish Coalition.” Again, crypsis, hiding in plain sight. Dave and Anne are repeat guests on Harris’s podcast, by the way.
Julia Ioffe is a Jewish neocon journalist who was born in the USSR and came to the US under Jackson-Vanik - see the vid linked at the bottom of that Sachs article here for her worldview.
To give you a feel for the DiResta agenda at Atlantic (remember, propaganda is “information with an agenda”), here are the titles of all of her articles there, from the beginning:
The Conspiracies Are Coming From Inside the House
For China, the ‘USA Virus’ Is a Geopolitical Ploy
Virus Experts Aren’t Getting the Message Out
The Supply of Disinformation Will Soon Be Infinite
The Right’s Disinformation Machine Is Getting Ready for Trump to Lose
Right-Wing Social Media Finalizes Its Divorce From Reality
Anti-vaxxers Think This Is Their Moment
The Misinformation Campaign Was Distinctly One-Sided
The Anti-Vaccine Influencers Who Are Merely Asking Questions
Institutional Authority Has Vanished. Wikipedia Points to the Answer.
It’s Not Misinformation. It’s Amplified Propaganda.
The Ukraine Crisis Briefly Put America’s Culture War in Perspective
Elon Musk Is Fighting for Attention, Not Free Speech
Arizona’s ‘Tricky Voting Machines’ Sounds Suspiciously Familiar
The Twitter Files Are a Missed Opportunity
It’s not difficult to glean some basic themes here. She’s attacking the Trumptard extreme right of course, and also internet-based alternative voices, in favor of “institutional authority”. The vaxx thing shifts from her roots in childhood vaccinations to the covid-19 vaxxes, and she more broadly attacks anything on covid that doesn’t come from those institutional authorities. Etc.
It’s not difficult to see this through the lense of ethnic or culture warfare either - she is supporting the US power structure in this century which, oh by the way, is decidedly Jewish, and given the level of Jewish control over the mainstream media she is attacking the vehicle for any opposition to that, the alternative media, new media. Covid and the vaxxes are another vehicle for the reinforcement of that control, a justification for a clampdown on alternative information which then can be repurposed for other projects - like anything even remotely linked to “antisemitism”. She has become a Jewish culture warrior like Sam Harris before her - I heard a rumor she’s going to start her own podcast and call it Vaxxing Sense…
As she said in her defining of propaganda, “to be most effective, propaganda is often anchored in a partial truth”, and that is clear here as well - when she said, “The Right’s Disinformation Machine Is Getting Ready for Trump to Lose” (Oct. ‘20) and “Anti-vaxxers Think This Is Their Moment” (Dec. ‘20) she was absolutely right, anyone who is acquainted with this stuff knew that a Trump defeat would be followed by wild claims of election tampering from the Trumptard right and that the covid vaccines would be framed conspiratorially before a single jab had been inflicted. Which doesn’t mean it’s all tinfoil hat conspiracy theory, but they sure as f@ck made it easier to frame it that way.
Last night I started reading a report from The Virality Project titled Memes, Magnets and Microchips - Narrative Dynamics Around COVID-19 Vaccines, published this year; DiResta is listed first as one of three executive editors. At the beginning they list key takeaways, which are:
Anti-vaccine narratives related to the COVID-19 vaccine are not new
Vaccine mis- and disinformation was largely driven by a cast of recurring
actors
Online engagement with vaccine mis- and disinformation is highly variable
and shaped by social media platforms’ structures and policies
The first basically equates the historic anti-vaxxers, the loons who are absolutely convinced the MMR vaccine has caused an epidemic of autism, etc., with the covid vaxx-hesitant, which essentially erases any legitimate concern over the vaccines, you’re either all in on the jab or you’re a nutter.
It’s the second that is most interesting:
• Actors within the US include long-standing anti-vaccine influencers and activists, wellness and lifestyle influencers, pseudomedical influencers, conspiracy theory influencers, right-leaning political influencers, and medical freedom influencers.
• Foreign actors in China, Russia, and Iran took a full-spectrum propaganda approach, spanning both media and social media, to influence vaccine conversations in the US and around the world. However, these actors’ reach appeared to be far less than that of domestic actors.
So domestically we have conspiracy theorists, charlatans and the right including libertarians, but internationally we have China, Russia and Iran! Now, China is a very legitimate concern in so many ways, but I have talked about how it gets linked with Russia to create the false paradigm of a replay of the old cold war by certain voices. But Russia and Iran, these are without any doubt the two nations most targeted by the neocons, their ultimate defeat/destruction being the essential core mission of neoconservatism, Iran as the biggest existential threat to Israel and Russia as the so-hated one-time mother of the Ashkenazim, the center of the pogrom antisemitism mythology, the other party in the 250 Years War going back to the first partition of Poland in 1772. And utilizing the same playbook as in the Russiagate hoax.
Free speech and democracy, the bottom line here: Is DiResta an advocate of free speech? Clearly not, her mission to stop platform algoriths from overemphasizing dissident voices is really an effort to push them into some dark corner of the internet where they will never see the light of day again. Which puts her in alignment with Jewry in general - they were free speech advocates 60 years ago when they were a people on the outside looking in, but now as the people on the inside looking out? Nope.
Is she a believer in American democracy? Among so many other things she's head of policy for Data for Democracy, so she must be, right? Clearly not, she is by all evidence a believer in subversive, covert Ashkenocracy, of minority rule - she doesn't want an open public square debating and deciding anything, she's apparently all about our “one dollar, one vote” democracy - as long as Jews continue to contribute far more shekels than anyone, that is. Her basic belief is framed as undermining establishment institutions is undermining democracy, which is only true if those institutions are controlled democratically, which they so clearly are not in this century. Do you think the State Dept today, or the Biden foreign policy team more broadly, is the product of real democracy? Were Americans in 2020 like Chris Walken on SNL back in the day, shouting “I gotta have more Jew!!!”?
Finally, another glimpse at DiResta, pre-Russiagating (at a Joogle event mid-2016, looking a little prego):
So how has internet platform censorship progressed since 2016? It's like day and night. Does she think that’s nearly enough? Fuck no, gotta shut this shit down completely.
Btw, I think I saw somewhere in all this digging that when New Knowledge decided it had to change its name to distance itself from its soiled reputation for integrity, DiResta’s simple suggestion was Neo Knowledge - as per usual, “neo” meaning…
Some day I’m gonna write a book about this conniving bee-atch. 😁 Or maybe one on both her and Harris - whose wife Annaka looks kinda Jewey-familiar as well, although apparently unverifiably so.
”According to the husband of Annaka Harris, both he and his wife are averse to discussing their private affairs and personal details in public because of security reasons, consequently, not much is known about the writer’s personal life.”
That’s one way to handle it…
Renee DiResta the Dark (Jewish-American) Princess of the Internet, from the NY Times
Of course that is assuming their co-ethnics’ war on Russia in Ukraine doesn’t end the world in a nuclear holocaust conflagration before I can get to writing the book… 🔥🔥
Ouch... I live in California and I'm anti-vax. The day that SB 277 passed the CA legislature and then was signed by Jerry Brown was the worst day of my life. There is no way to explain without writing as much as you write. Maybe one thought. There was this thing called the gut/brain connection. You destroy your gut through chemicals and poisons and it leaks to your brain. That's a vax theme. Of course, it's not the only one, but she is clueless that this info came out of anti-vax world but she probably gives her kids yogurt when they take their antibiotics. I loathe her, truly. thanks for the expo.