raichik

Interesting that you immediately just assumed it's Raichik lying rather than Anthony, who is a politician after all.

Wikipedia editors generally exhibit honest behaviour that your preferred propaganda outlet handler Chaya Raichik conspicuously lacks.

To be more pointed than logicprog, Raichik just lies a lot.

Feel free to peruse the long cited list of occasions in which Chaya Raichik outright lied on libsoftiktok, it's in their wikipedia article which reads as one long controversy section.

That’s how this works: Chaya Raichik claims to just be sharing real things but in reality is often providing heavy spin or outright misrepresenting what she shares, encourages hate (e.g.

Consider how people like Loomer and Raichik that have emerged, not through established power brokers, but organically through social media platforms, and the significant influence they possess even in the White House.

Instead, what we see is bending over backwards to keep people like Trump or Raichik from having the rules applied to them, with no mention of government pressure to yank them.

Chaya Raichik is a public figure that has gone on national news programs to discuss her views and spread them as widely as possible, furthermore she used her real name in public records associated with the monetization of her brand.

Just because, as Chaya Raichik complained the other day, that she should be able to say what she wants because "there's no law against lying," doesn't mean that platforms have to necessarily allow harmful bullshit either.

Chaya Raichik aka "Libs of TikTok" lied.

Washington Post writer Taylor Lorenz published the full name and address of the (previously anonymous) LibsOfTikTok writer Chaya Raichik, forcing Chaya to flee her home in fear for her life[1].

Where it's fine to ban things like this, but not the hacked private information about Canadian Freedom Convoy donors, or Trump and family hacks, or the doxing of Libs of Ticktok founder Chaya Raichik.