Between alllllll these accounts they have >MILLIONS< of posts, and I can count the number of times they've even mentioned the single most influential lobbying group on one hand.
And Carlson may not tweet "AIPAC" much, but he is the guy that platformed Massie saying every congressperson has an AIPAC handler. In fact, that's the very interview you're dismissing. "It's just a timecode," but of course it's the timecode for AIPAC being explicitly called out as a powerful foreign interest lobby group whose interests do not align with America's. Kind of a lot to brush off.
I agree that some of these people are very imperfect, and I would even say a few of these people are downright useless. But I think your reducing the "are they good" check to a single search term that isn't even exhaustive for the one issue you're looking at is kind of retarded.
95% of the front page X posts on T_D all come from the same six fags, and all you have to do is search their name for AIPAC.
Here, I already did it for you in another post:
DC Draino: https://nitter.poast.org/search?f=tweets&q=from%3Adc_draino+aipac&since=&until=&near=
Jack Posobiec: https://nitter.poast.org/search?f=tweets&q=from%3Ajackposobiec+aipac&since=&until=&near=
Wall Street Apes: https://nitter.poast.org/search?f=tweets&q=from%3Awallstreetapes+aipac&since=&until=&near=
Steven Crowder: https://nitter.poast.org/search?f=tweets&q=from%3Ascrowder+aipac&since=&until=&near=
Patrick Bet-David: https://nitter.poast.org/search?f=users&q=from%3Apatrickbetdavid+aipac
Only once from Tucker Carlson, and it was just a timecode in an interview: https://nitter.poast.org/search?f=tweets&q=from%3Atuckercarlson+aipac
Catturd only twice, 6 years ago, but mentioned in passing: https://nitter.poast.org/search?f=tweets&q=from%3Acatturd2+aipac&since=&until=&near=
LOTT (((unsurprising))): https://xcancel.com/search?f=tweets&q=from%3Alibsoftiktok+aipac&since=&until=&near=
Emerald Robinson: https://xcancel.com/search?f=tweets&q=from%3Aemeraldrobinson+aipac&since=&until=&near=
Amuse only once, and it sounds like he's crying that they didn't give more to Republicans: https://nitter.poast.org/search?f=tweets&q=from%3Aamuse+aipac&since=&until=&near=
Between alllllll these accounts they have >MILLIONS< of posts, and I can count the number of times they've even mentioned the single most influential lobbying group on one hand.
Well, to be fair to Emerald Robinson....
And Carlson may not tweet "AIPAC" much, but he is the guy that platformed Massie saying every congressperson has an AIPAC handler. In fact, that's the very interview you're dismissing. "It's just a timecode," but of course it's the timecode for AIPAC being explicitly called out as a powerful foreign interest lobby group whose interests do not align with America's. Kind of a lot to brush off.
I agree that some of these people are very imperfect, and I would even say a few of these people are downright useless. But I think your reducing the "are they good" check to a single search term that isn't even exhaustive for the one issue you're looking at is kind of retarded.