Some deceitful idiot from the New York Times yesterday posted a screen shot of my tweet, out of context, to imply I said no Parler users were involved in the protest.

Anyone literate could see my point: FB & YouTube were used far more, exactly what this new reporting shows: https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1349490174082899968

WPost: "A growing body of evidence shows Facebook played a much larger role than Sandberg suggested.

The #StopTheSteal hashtag was widely used on the service ...when a search on Facebook reported 128,000 people were talking about it and ... using it to coordinate for the rally."

That prompts again the same question I asked in my article and tweets (that the NYT reporter blatantly distorted):

Why didn't Dem politicians, and journalists, demand that Apple & Google remove *FB* from their stores given the much larger role it played than Parler?

Here's the tweet the slimy NYT reporter took out of context to imply I said no Parler users were involved in the Captiol breach.

A) Anyone who can read can see it didn't say that.
B) This tweet is 100% accurate.
C) Learn to think critically & don't blindly believe NYT reporters.

Facebook has been repeatedly proven to be a venue for provoking mass violence and promoting extremism. But it contributes huge amounts of money to the Dem Party, and has massive power over journalists. So they decided to destroy Parler when FB's role was far bigger.

This is the lead paragraph of the WPost article, which pretty clearly accuses Sheryl Sandberg of lying about FB's role.

I don't think FB is responsible, but by the standards imposed this week by Dems & Silicon Valley, why shouldn't FB be banned from Apple & Google's stores?