Careful, If you say something is paywalled they'll get really fucking mad that you're not paying for journalism, and then have absolutely no idea how ironic that is in this context lmao

From what I figure, Taylor Lorenz is rightfully suspicious of that 16-whatever group(of which the guy you posted doesn't disclose who funds them, which is where it gets even more suspicious), but her presentation was only effective to & advantageous for those who already are anti-Democrat.

I can, on some level, agree with this actually. I just... Don't care if I'm honest. I don't care for the same reason I kinda don't care how tim pool was funded--i care that MISINFORMATION was funded. The source is juicy, but the facts are what I give a shit about tbh and this just doesn't get there

Like, it would never matter to me how transparent a neo-nazi's funding is, and it will also never matter to me how hidden the funding of a children's food bank is as long as the kids are fed. This is a story about a non story to me and even the details are boring horseshit

it is not paywalled i can read the entire article just fine with no block why would you lie about something so easy to check

also even if it was, the internet archive exists if you wanna bypass paywalls... it's really fucking easy to do that