Media CHEERS As Ukraine Leaker Arrested; Identified as an ‘Antiwar Libertarian’

Saagar Enjeti of Breaking Points discusses his reaction to the Document Leaker begin arrested and the news media’s focus on uncovering the leaker rather than investigating the stories.

The Washington Post identifies him as a libertarian. A member of his online group was quoted in the New York Post as “a Christian, antiwar, just wanted to inform some of his friends about what’s going on.”

46 thoughts on “Media CHEERS As Ukraine Leaker Arrested; Identified as an ‘Antiwar Libertarian’”


    The pseudo-WikiLeaks 2.0 has just been stepped up a notch as the FBI arrested the perpetrator who shared the “secret docs” through a Discord server. The 21-year-old Airman First Class Jack Douglas Teixeira of the Massachusetts Air National Guard was apprehended on April 13 for his involvement with the “top-secret leak”. The controversial “Pentagon docs” contain what the US mainstream propaganda machine claims is “an array of national security secrets, including the breadth of surveillance the United States is able to conduct on Russia”.

    1. I see the link goes to a BRICS site.
      Wait for the Durban meeting in August, there is talk of them intoducing a competing combined currency there….
      Heads will explode if it happens.

      1. Yes it does, and I read the whole world from many sources daily Pitts. Thanks for your time and comment!

        March 19, 2023 |The US Has the World Setup for a Worse Financial Crisis than in 2008

        There are two main avenues to a potential US financial crisis. Such a crisis, because of US financial dominance and because of the interconnections of globalism, which was a huge mistake for humanity, would be international.

        1. Thanks for the link! I can remember several classes from years ago dealing with derivatives and it seems we’ve on the cusp of collapse from them for years…lol.
          Honestly I’m of the belief (that many share)that a competing BRIC “buck” will lower the value of the dollar making cheap Schiff from off shored production cost prohibitive and will revive domestic production. Global corporation profits will suffer but it will decrease the need to protect our trade routes so insufferably.
          Here’s a few of the sites from the myriad of those I hang out at:
          BRICS Group Works On A New Form Of Currency
          State Duma Deputy Chairman Alexander Babakov said Thursday that ideas on creating a new form of currency will be presented at the organization’s upcoming summit in South Africa.
          On the sidelines of the Business Forum of the Russian-Indian Strategic Partnership for Development and Growth, Babakov said that work is underway on the creation of a new form of currency.

          Silk Road Briefing always is interesting:
          Egypt’s Membership Of BRICS: Opportunities and Prospects

          China Labor Watch is another site to “watch”
          (no one wants to talk about neocolonialism nor modern day slavery anymore but they do)
          and lastly if one is interested in the South China Sea and the countries in that area (Thailand’s elections are sounding like a comical farce) there’s Benar News

    2. Now the US & its allies have another scapegoat besides Russia. It’s Jack Teixeira. I wish he could talk the military into going on strike & have the media broadcast what the public should know on TV, in print & on the internet without being caught.

      1. I hear you friend! The globe is battling the Pentagon and weapon contractors and corporations.

        March 13, 2023 Surge in Global Weapons Sales: Top Ten Exporters of Major Arms

        65% Increase in Arms Imports by EU-NATO Countries. Ukraine has became the 3rd biggest importer of major arms during 2022.

      2. Anyone in the media who participated in outing and/or catching Teixeira should lose their job. These people are not journalists, they are propagandists, and they actually work for the rich & powerful to promote their propaganda & lies.

  2. The media (of which helped the government ID the guy) sure aren’t the muckrakers of old.
    We are being treated to story after story about this guy but hardly anything about the myriad of lies were have been told about this war.
    The press is so focused on this guy they won’t even ask about what the contents of the leaks in the pressers with government officials and how darn near everything about this war has been a lie including their belief Ukraine can win it.

    1. That’s because the mass media is part of corporate America, and its job is not to provide real news, but instead to propagandize and brainwash people. In this instance, that’s accomplished by getting people to hate the leaker and ignore what he leaked (if this is even real as opposed to some CIA op). Breaking Points discussed what they thought were the important pieces of information here, and Jimmy Dore said that he doesn’t think any of this is new and he suspects CIA shenanigans, but at least they discussed the information supposedly leaked. That’s what real news organizations would be doing, but instead we get this garbage, and “reporters” badgering some military guy in a press conference about why security isn’t better.

      1. It’s not new stuff ( this started in January) which perhaps it seems not to be all that earth shattering today.
        The western press is absolutely infuriating….
        Sudan is currently blowing up but it’s darn hard to keep updated given the focus of our media.
        Perhaps that’s why google translate is getting a workout around here…

  3. I just heard his mom on TV.
    She is from Russia…
    Let the conspiracies begin…….

    1. Interesting. Mother from Russia. Son in important position in U.S. military. Very interesting. This is getting good.

      1. Wait for her religion to be shared.
        The J haters will wet themselves over the opportunity she will present.
        It will be ugly and just another way for some to ignore the comtents of the leak while rallying their side.
        The guy is really similar to the Pentagon papers in which the public learned we were being lied to about a war albeit he just wanted his little group of introverted gamers to know we were being fed lies and the media is siding with the liars instead of being journalists.

  4. As much of a vile pig as he is, Donald Trump was right about “fake news.” Not for the reasons that he thinks, but right nonetheless.

    The mass media are the enemy, just like the ruling class and its government. The days of any real journalism in mainstream/corporate/establishment media are long gone. If you want anything resembling the truth, you have to do some work to find it. This site, the Grayzone, Jimmy Dore, Glenn Greenwald (mostly commentary), Aaron Mate, and Matt Taibbi are some good sources off the top of my head. The mainstream media is just corporate propaganda, albeit the most sophisticated propaganda with enough true facts (out of context) mixed in to fool people.

    1. Today’s media is no different than the Progressive era’s preeminent historian, Charles A. Beard. (1874-1948)
      His book, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States (which has been debunked by several different authors and by his contemporary peers) was written using what he called “historical relativism” which in the way he practiced, was to tell a story to persuade the American public to view a event in a certain way and thereby act in the desired manner.
      Facts were to be used that furthered the story/narrative even if other facts were even more solid/true but would not tell the “correct” narrative.
      Today’s media practice their craft in the same way.

      1. The difference is that you could get some good information from the establishment media a few decades ago. Now, it’s all just propaganda, far more than it used to be. No more Walter Cronkite or Bill Moyers, no more showing what war is actually like, etc.

        1. Cronkite and Moyers were propagandists but were freindly ones who could lie while smiling at you.

          1. I understand that they weren’t radicals, but they were honest reporters. We’ll have to agree to disagree on this, I see no point in arguing about it. If you can’t tell the difference between the mainstream news back then and now, I don’t know what to tell you. Not saying that there weren’t better sources of news, because there were, but mainstream news was nowhere near as bad then.

          2. Mainstream media back then fed us the party line but we only had them to decide from and no one to compare them to.
            My earliest memories of “news” is literally the Pentegon hearings on TV then I can remember Cronkite telling me about Vietnam of which I was to find out he was reading lies to me and parents every day about that war.
            It was a great innocent time and like you I have great memories about how we felt about our news readers and the occasional real journalist back then too. But…
            Walter lied to us way too many times about that war and a lot of other things for me to “like” him nowadays. He’s just another guy from the upper classes looking down on the rest of us telling us what he and his friends believe we should know and tell it to us in ways to get us to do stuff.
            Like fight wars until it was fashionable to be against it.

          3. Hi ZaSu
            There was one exception to the rule, and his name was Peter Jennings.
            May he rest in peace.

          4. Cronkite eventually opposed the Vietnam war. This change of mind shows that he was saying what he believed. The large majority of Americans supported the war at first, but that changed when they saw what was really happening.

            Additionally, reporters in Vietnam weren’t limited to being “embedded” with the military back then, so they could do real reporting. I remember quite clearly the horrifying TV news images of actual combat situations, with soldiers getting killed & wounded. That kind of thing is very important so that people can have a realistic idea of what war is really like. There is nothing like that now, just propaganda from the fake news media.

          5. He opposed it once it was OK to do so.
            I’m sure he had to know years prior to his public switch he was reading lies to us in those calming tones.
            He’s dead and to be honest I didn’t watch him in his later years as our options grew, so I’ll stop wizzing on his grave ….lol.

          6. I liked both of them and felt they did their best to put the truth out there but certainly their first responsibility would be to the network.

          7. Was he not paid by the government to share approved narratives?
            One can be a “nice” guy but still be a propagandist.

          8. Moyers challenged power. He’d never get a show today. He wasn’t radical, but he nevertheless said things and provided news that I’m sure angered the establishment.

          9. Sure he angered some but he worked for an arm of the government at the end.
            I just do not trust completely those who are paid by those I definately do not trust at all is perhaps the best way to put my paranoia?

          10. Well, if you’re going to practice journalism for a living, you have to get paid by someone. Generally it’s going to be some big corporation, or in some instances the government. A better model is to charge people who read/watch/listen to you in order to avoid undue influence, but 1) it’s difficult to reach a large audience that way; and 2) podcasts, which is the only medium that could reach a large number of people using this funding model, didn’t exist when Moyers was a journalist; and 3) I don’t know if you could earn a living by just getting subscription money.

          11. Given that Twitter is getting into a subscription model similar to substack it must be a money maker.
            I however am a cheapo and just free trial spam those who require money for subscriptions….lol.

          12. Moyers wrote election propaganda for LBJ. I believe he came up with the idea of the little girl picking flowers right before a looming mushroom cloud appeared.

          13. Johnson was running against Barry Goldwater, a psychopath who openly wanted to start a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. I’m not only fine with that commercial, I totally agree with it. I condemn Johnson for the Vietnam war, but at least he didn’t want to start a nuclear war.

            And BTW, I remember that commercial.

          14. Never heard that one before, and I’ve heard some pretty wild accusations of him. I know of no documentation for that. Where’s the quote for him saying this ? That’s an example of the kind of similar propaganda to what is used in the 21st century. When they want their guys in, they stop at nothing to destroy the opponent. Read his autobiography, and research from there if interested. Funny how before the 64 campaign he was considered an elder statesman that they all went to for advice. Then during the campaign, he was an unreasonable homicidal psychopath. After the election, he went back to being the elder statesman again that everyone went to for advice. :-) Political campaigns are like wars. Truth becomes a casualty.

          15. Sounds like you weren’t around for this. I was (as a kid), and I tried to volunteer for Johnson because of Goldwater’s nuclear war mongering. This was not propaganda, it was Goldwater’s position, and he wasn’t shy about expounding it.

            I don’t think you have a clue what was going on back then, and you’re just being propagandized by people whose ideology you share.

            And yes, Johnson was a nasty politician who used embarrassing personal information to coerce other politicians to do what he wanted. The good thing is that on domestic issues, he was excellent.

          16. I was a kid then, too. In researching him and his history, it was evident that he had a tendency to “shoot from the hip” at that time, but I can’t find him advocating first strikes. The defoliation flap, he actually said be wouldn’t use nuclear devices, even for that, but that it would work for the purpose. The off the cuff remark about “lobbing one in the Kremlin barhroom” was to make a point about national DEFENSE being more important than going to the moon. “Nuclear” wasn’t mentioned. Of course, he should have used more discretion with such a statement. But that was him. Back then, wanting to be tough on the Soviets was not uncommon. He was guilty of being a man of his times and speaking without thinking on the campaign trail. My main point, was that overall, in his voting record and actions, he was highly respected, and had the reputation of honesty, and the ability to change as he acquired more knowledge. His record shows that he was far from being a “sociopath”, but was one of the more principled politicians. Without a balanced overall view of someone, it’s a disservice to slander them. Thanks for putting up with such a long, off the point of this thread reply. :-)

          17. I agree that Goldwater was honest about his positions and had integrity in that regard. But I don’t have to do any research, because I remember being shocked at his position to what at the time we called atomic (not nuclear) war with the Soviet Union. We’d just come out of the Cuban Missile Crisis, and I could not have been more opposed to getting back into that kind of situation. When Goldwater started sabre rattling against the Soviet Union, it made me support Johnson very strongly (that and Johnson’s infinitely better position on civil rights).

  5. Come on people cut me a break. Media is all about propaganda. So is history. It all depends on whose bull your willing to buy. I find myself buying onto the hype from time to time. Then when I read further and more information becomes available. I course correct my views as needed. Like a friend of mine once said.” we’re in control of nothing.”

    1. The no-nothing attitude is just establishment BS to promote the status quo that benefits them. Of course we can know historical facts. Opinions are subjective, but facts are either true, false, unknown, or unknowable. Would you deny that we know for a fact that Europeans came to the U.S. and killed the Natives & stole their land? Or that Europeans enslaved Africans? Or that the Nazis in Germany murdered millions of Jews and others they didn’t like?

      If you’re referring to context, that’s another issue. As the saying goes, history is written by the winners. But that said, you can almost always find other points of view also and put things in context.

    2. I got into an argument with the instructor in the Historiography course I took in college. He went ballistic when I suggested that a historian just may look for “evidence” that supports his conclusions. He said the historian seeks truth. I responded by telling him that I believed the “truth” was what the historian says it is. “Facts” can be assembled to concur the historian’s personal view.

      1. This is the important reason to have freedom of speech: let’s get all the true facts on the table, as well as informed opinions based on those facts, so we can make informed decisions. Doesn’t happen in reality unfortunately, but that’s the idea.

  6. The media didn’t just cheer this on, which would have been bad enough. They actually played a leading role in capturing the guy. Instead of journalists holding the government to account for its actions and showing the public what the government is doing and when it’s lying, the media has become the propaganda arm of the government. This situation is a new low, and is yet another example of why this society’s ruling structure needs to be torn down and totally rebuilt.

  7. He’s just been used a a patsy. Didn’t and couldn’t have access to the documents that are hung on him. The content analysis of the leaked materials indicates disinfo and manipulation attempt.

    1. That’s what it seems like to me also, though we can never know without some whistleblower coming forward.

      Jimmy Dore first raised this issue as soon as the docs were released, and he’s usually right about this kind of thing. One thing he pointed out is that there’s no new substantial information here, just basically the same stuff we’ve known for months (“we” meaning those of us who have good sources and don’t just rely on corporate/mainstream/establishment propaganda).

Comments are closed.