Crypto News
From Cyberspace to Outer Space: Will Fiat Imperialism Push Mining Off-Planet?
From Cyberspace to Outer Space
Tension is building in the mines. As the 4th Halving nears and the block reward trims to 3.125 bitcoin per block, miners must not only adapt to a significantly diminished reward, but contend with an increasingly profit-hostile future which might have surprised even the prescient Nakamoto. Indeed, despite widespread hope that fiat states will come to accept peaceful coexistence with bitcoin—I, too, would prefer this outcome—and despite some modest grounds for optimism, history would remind us that kings and emperors do not willingly relinquish power. This is no less true of modern fiat empires, as Lyn Alden’s survey of U.S. fiat interventionism explains.1 History, coupled with ongoing observation of federal actions—foreign and domestic—will be sufficient to calibrate our expectations and help guard us against understandable, yet self-deceptive naivete. Accordingly, of all the imminent mining challenges, the most formidable might well be increasing state opposition. If accurate, then conditions may rapidly deteriorate such that off-planet mining might merit serious consideration.
The Miners’ Earthly Dilemma
As the Halvings inexorably march on, the mining equation keeps changing. For example, in 14 short years mining has evolved from enthusiasts on personal computers to mammoth structures housing thousands of water-cooled Antminer S19s with 5nm chips pulling over 750 MW of electricity.
Each stage of mining evolution has faced unique challenges. Those anticipated with the 4th Halving this April will include, among others: assured access to cheaper energy, acquisition of more efficient ASIC chips despite a global shortage and shipment delays (exacerbated by U.S.-China-Taiwan animus), the possibility of 3nm chip miners, hashrate increase, hashprice decline, the impact of AI, environmental propaganda attacks, and maddeningly-inscrutable bitcoin value projections made no less easier by the advent of large investment firms in the bitcoin ecosystem—all within the context of a frangible, debt-bloated, de-dollarizing economy.
Were these the only issues to resolve they’d be sufficiently daunting. However, a more problematic attack vector, as I’ve presented previously,2 is the possibility of the fiat-empowered superpower and its retinue of dollar-subservient vassals hindering free market bitcoin activities.
Logically, the character and magnitude of state friction would be correlated and proportionate to bitcoin popularity over fiat’s existing sphere of influence and control. If the U.S. monetary system, reaping the ill effects of decades of manipulation and recent global de-dollarization, begins imploding while bitcoin strengthens, federal response will be strong. It will be unlikely to accept contraction of its fiat power and be open to a bitcoin standard. Rather, it will cling to the legacy system from which it so easily accumulated its power and attack the emergence. In so doing, upon realizing that it can’t kill bitcoin, it will first seek to isolate it from its owners in cyberspace.3 A complementary line of attack would then be to neutralize mining. With bitcoin isolated and mining disrupted, in their view, public trust in bitcoin would dissolve; the threat would be neutralized.
Elements of a mining attack might include two elements: First, a propaganda operation: facts notwithstanding, miners would be slandered as shadowy crypto profiteers irresponsibly increasing CO2 emissions and consuming vast stores of finite energy while driving prices up and diverting energy from socially-beneficial uses. Second, a bureaucratic operation: miners would face a torrent of regulation, from licensing and zoning requirements, environmental restrictions, energy and CO2 quotas, to unreasonable reporting requirements replete with unprecedented KYC intrusions, and punitive taxation. In short, the combined economic, regulatory, and propaganda challenges of such an attack would be near insurmountable.
In recent years, when a jurisdiction became inhospitable—one is reminded of China’s mining ban still in effect since mid 20214—the conventional playbook offered but two options: attempt to go underground (risky), or relocate to a bitcoin-hospitable jurisdiction (disruptive and costly).
The Search for New Sanctuary
Analyzing this potential quandary militarily, we might turn to a concept from the field of counterinsurgent warfare: sanctuary. U.S. Army doctrine recognizes the historic principle that insurgents require areas of sanctuary within which to rest, reconsolidate, and sustain operations:
Access to external . . . sanctuaries [have] always influenced the effectiveness of insurgencies . . . provid[ing] insurgents places to rebuild and reorganize without fear of counterinsurgent interference. . . Sanctuaries traditionally were physical safe havens, such as base areas, and this form of safe haven still exists . . . [But,] modern target acquisition and intelligence-gathering technology make insurgents in isolation, even in neighboring states, more vulnerable.5
How might this apply to bitcoin mining? If we posit the State inevitably regarding bitcoin as a monetary insurgent against which it must act to preserve its fiat power, miners will scramble to find inviolable sanctuaries in order to continue operations.
Currently, miners possess adequate jurisdictions within which to mine. In fact, hope yet flickers as we see a few bitcoin-friendly jurisdictions emerging, such as Oman,6—usually within what the West calls the “third world,” but which might be accurately labelled the neo-colonial, fiat-wrecked world. Additionally, even despite the 2021 mining ban the hashrate in China quickly recovered and exceeded its previous rate.7 This situation, however, can change with astonishing speed. Accommodating jurisdictions today can quickly turn inhospitable tomorrow.
Viewed differently: Bitcoin already has existential sanctuary— anchored securely in the blockchain, it is existentially permissionless and will continue existing untouchable in cyberspace. Its existence may be said to be inviolate. However, it currently lacks reproductive sanctuary. Mining occurs not in cyberspace, but in geographic space, within nations where market hospitality, regulation, and energy access is unpredictable. Further, mining now largely occurs within extensive, immobile structures which cannot easily “go underground” or quickly relocate.
But even the above simplification is inaccurate in that bitcoin’s existence is not fully secure in cyberspace without mining. As Andreas Antonopoulos explains,
Mining secures the bitcoin system and enables the emergence of network-wide consensus without a central authority. . . The purpose of mining is not the creation of new bitcoin. That’s the incentive system. Mining is the mechanism by which bitcoin’s security is decentralized.8
Thus, mining is necessary to secure the bitcoin ecosystem as well as to forge new coin. As such, if earthly mining sanctuaries start dwindling under persecution of an ailing fiat geriatric, in light of recent commercial space success, miners might do well to look starward, to the ungoverned frontier of space. Space offers the ultimate physical sanctuary, freed from the hostile overreaches of earthbound authorities. It might provide the physical sanctuary elegantly complementing bitcoin’s cyber sanctuary.
Extraterrestrial Dreams
Inspired by Elon Musk’s Space-X and Starlink ventures which provide conceptual proof-of-principle for considering the feasibility of off-planet solar mining, what form might such an endeavor take?
One could visualize mining rigs nestled in modular, expandable mining satellites, minesats, outfitted with wings of ultra-light solar cells and inflatable mirrors placed into high, sun-synchronous orbits (SSO) (~ 600-1000 km above the Earth) perpetually facing the sun for uninterrupted energy harvesting. Incidentally, a number of nations including the U.S, China, Japan, and the UK, also see incredible potential in off-planet solar energy and are already pursuing Space-Based Solar Power (SBSP) for use on Earth.9
Ever the earthbound miner’s challenge, heat dissipation remains a problem even in frigid space as it cannot be dissipated through conduction or convection. Instead, satellites and other structures usually rely on radiation to offload heat. For example, the International Space Station (ISS) employs a system called the External Active Thermal Control System (EATCS) employing heat radiators positioned in the shade side.10 Minesats would likely use a similar system for cooling.
Again, borrowing from Musk’s Starlink example, these higher orbit, SSO minesats would either network to a constellation of lower orbit smallsats (small satellites) which provide broadband internet connectivity to the planet, or connect directly to the bitcoin nodal network themselves.
Operating from the frontier of space, ungoverned by nation states, mining would be freed of licensing and zoning requirements, as well as CO2 and energy propaganda smear campaigns.
To take our thought experiment further, one could imagine this fleet of solar-powered minesats transported to their orbits from launchpads in forward-thinking, bitcoin-embracing nations, such as El Salvador, and potentially Argentina (should the pro-bitcoin presidential candidate Javier Milei win his upcoming election). In the case of El Salvador, it could provide not only physical sanctuary for politically-attacked firms like Space-X11 but, located over a thousand miles nearer the equator than any U.S. launch location, would provide a geographically superior planetary location enabling spacecraft to achieve escape velocity more efficiently. One could even postulate the migration of bitcoin-specific mining chip research and manufacturing to such a visionary nation, symbiotically co-locating the essential elements and activities of bitcoin.
Not long ago the idea of a private company outperforming NASA by employing reusable, upright-landing spacecraft and deploying a constellation of satellites providing global internet access would have been considered quixotic and naïve. Equally outlandish: that a nation would declare bitcoin legal tender. Perhaps the idea of extraterrestrial, satellite-based bitcoin mining facilitated by a visionary company that is repeatedly taking NASA to school, and partnering with a bitcoin-embracing nation of the Global South is not such a long shot. Indeed, it might well be the bright orange path.
1.Lyn Alden, Broken Money, Why Our Financial System is Failing Us and How We Can Make it Better, pp 109-150.
2.https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/bitcoin-must-become-a-medium-of-exchange-to-survive
3.Ibid
4.https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-58896545
5.Field Manual 3-24 Counterinsurgency, HQ, Department of the Army, Dec 2006, p 1-16.
8.Andreas Antonopoulos, Mastering Bitcoin: Programming the Open Blockchain, 2d ed., 229.
9.https://theconversation.com/a-solar-power-station-in-space-heres-how-it-would-work-and-the-benefits-it-could-bring-179344 Also see: https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/blog/2020/02/space-based-solar-power
10.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_Active_Thermal_Control_System
11.https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-spacex-discriminating-against-asylees-and-refugees-hiring#:~:text=The%20lawsuit%20alleges%20that%2C%20from,and%20Nationality%20Act%20(INA). Also see https://www.rawstory.com/elizabeth-warrens-fight-with-elon-musk-heats-up-as-she-calls-for-starlink-investigation/
A serious consideration of the possibilities and motivations for orbital bitcoin mining platforms.
Today, MicroStrategy announced it purchased an additional 15,400 bitcoin for approximately $1.5 billion. This brings its total holdings to over 400,000 BTC, almost 2% of the entire bitcoin supply.
MicroStrategy now owns 402,100 #bitcoin worth $38 BILLION
They now own almost 2% of the total bitcoin supply 🤯 pic.twitter.com/lbEpHNer7T
— Nikolaus Hoffman (@NikolausHoff) December 2, 2024
In the month of November, bitcoin rose almost 40% while MicroStrategy bought over $12 billion in bitcoin. In total, MicroStrategy now owns over $38 billion in bitcoin.
Other companies are now starting to copy the Microstrategy play book and run their strategy of accumulating bitcoin as a strategic reserve asset. Saylor even presented to Microsoft’s CEO and board of directors on why they should adopt a bitcoin standard. Microsoft is the third largest company in the world by market cap, and is voting on whether or not they should add bitcoin to their balance sheet. Insane!
Publicly traded bitcoin miner MARA is also copying MicroStrategy’s playbook and announced today that they’re raising up to $805 million in debt to buy more bitcoin.
Do you get it yet?
This is not going to stop any time soon. We have officially entered a new era of bitcoin accumulation that is being led by these large corporations. Saylor, MicroStrategy, and other companies are going to scoop up every available coin they can get their hands on. And if they’re as convicted as MicroStrategy is — they’re not selling. That’s not even to mention the other big players now (BlackRock, Fidelity, ARK, etc) buying up coins for their ETFs. The amount of demand for bitcoin today is surreal.
Companies that adopted a Strategic #Bitcoin Reserve this month:
– Rumble
– LQR House
– Remixpoint
– Genius Group
– Cosmos Health
– Jiva Technologies
– Hoth Therapeutics
– Thumzup Media Corp
– Acurx PharmaceuticalsAnd this is just the beginning 🚀 pic.twitter.com/6YW7D2DnRn
— Nikolaus Hoffman (@NikolausHoff) November 27, 2024
I think that everyone (this message is mainly for the newer Bitcoiners) should follow suit in adopting their own personal strategic bitcoin reserve for themselves and their families. I’m not saying or advising anyone to take on debt to buy bitcoin, but rather adopt it as your primary savings account and sit back and take in all the benefits of holding bitcoin — especially in regards to holding your own private keys.
The plan is simple: buy bitcoin, secure it safely, and hold it for the long term. If you sell, you will be selling directly into the hands of MicroStrategy and every other company running this playbook.
This article is a Take. Opinions expressed are entirely the author’s and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
When you sell bitcoin, MSTR and others are buying it.
We can’t live in a world where somebody starts a company that’s a completely legal thing, and then they literally [] get sanctioned [] and embargoed by the United States government through a completely unaccountable [process] by the way. No due process. None of this is written down. There’s no rules. There’s no court, there’s no decision process. There’s no appeal. Who do you appeal to, right? [] Who do you go to to get your bank account back?
— Marc Andreessen, speaking to Joe Rogan, published on 11/26/2024
In yet another troubling manifestation of “Chokepoint 2.0,” a Wyoming company was summarily debanked in early November, 2024, by Mercury, a banking platform operated with Evolve Bank (and other banking partners). After years of seamless operations and exemplary service, Mercury abruptly terminated the account without clear cause. The excuse? A vague nod to “internal factors” that remain as opaque as the regulatory pressures likely behind them.
Let’s be clear: The company’s banking activity was uncontroversial. The only potential offense is that the company accepts a sizable portion of its customer payments in Bitcoin. Aside from monthly wires from Kraken (a regulated crypto exchange), its transactions included rent, utility payments, hardware store purchases, and subcontractor invoices.
The termination couldn’t have had anything to do with risky behavior or financial misconduct. Instead, the closure is emblematic of a systemic effort to hobble Bitcoin businesses by exploiting the centralized banking choke points regulators have turned into tools of suppression.
This is Chokepoint 2.0 in action. Regulators have found new ways to suppress industries they disfavor—this time, targeting Bitcoin miners and businesses. Instead of legislative debate or due process, unelected bureaucrats leverage their oversight of banks to nudge them into “de-risking” clients that engage in entirely legal activities. The company was simply collateral damage in the campaign to isolate Bitcoin from the traditional financial system.
This is a chilling echo of Operation Chokepoint 1.0, where federal regulators illegally pressured banks to cut off services to lawful but disfavored industries, such as firearms dealers and payday lenders. That campaign ended in disgrace when the FDIC was forced to settle a lawsuit in 2019. The settlement affirmed what should have been obvious: weaponizing the financial system against legal businesses is unconstitutional. Regulators know this—and yet here we are again.
Why This Matters
Debanking isn’t just an inconvenience. For businesses, it’s existential. Operating without a reliable banking partner in today’s economy is like trying to breathe without air. When banks are coerced into severing ties with Bitcoin-related companies, it sends a chilling message: engage in this industry at your peril. It also stifles innovation, a dangerous precedent for a country founded on economic freedom.
Moreover, this practice undermines the core tenet of fairness in financial services. The American banking system isn’t a private fiefdom. It operates under public charters and with public trust, and its gatekeepers should not act as arbiters of political or ideological purity.
The harm extends beyond Bitcoin. If regulators can throttle this industry, what stops them from targeting others? What happens when innovation, dissent, or inconvenient truths are deemed “too risky” for the comfort of entrenched powers? This is about more than Bitcoin—it’s about the integrity of the financial system and the preservation of free markets.
A Call to Action: Accountability for Regulators
The new Congress and Trump administration must seize this moment to hold the architects of Chokepoint 2.0 accountable. This isn’t a partisan issue; it’s a constitutional one. Regulators acting as de facto lawmakers, imposing policies that would never survive public scrutiny, must be reigned in.
- Investigations into Regulatory Overreach
Congress must launch comprehensive investigations into the agencies pressuring banks to sever ties with Bitcoin businesses. Who issued these directives? Under what authority? The American people deserve answers, and the offending parties deserve consequences.
- Personal Accountability for Regulators
Bureaucrats who abuse their power should not be shielded by the anonymity of the regulatory machine. Those responsible for weaponizing the financial system against lawful businesses must be named, shamed, and removed from their positions, permanently lose any security clearances they may have, and potentially lose their government pensions and retirement benefits.
- Restoration of Due Process
Any decisions to restrict banking access should require clear, codified standards and a transparent appeals process. No more shadow rules. If a business is to be debanked, the reasons should be public, defensible, clearly articulated & defined, grounded in law, and appealable.
- Legislation to Protect Financial Access
Congress should pass laws prohibiting banks from discriminating against lawful industries based on political or ideological reasons. The free market thrives on neutrality; it withers under bias.
- Decentralization of Financial Systems
Bitcoin exists as a hedge against precisely this kind of overreach. Policymakers should embrace and encourage its growth, not fight it. America cannot afford to fall behind in the global race for financial innovation.
Much of the above could be addressed through Section 10 of the SAFER Banking Act, which directly limits undue regulatory influence over banking services. Specifically, it prohibits federal banking agencies from pressuring financial institutions to terminate relationships with lawful businesses, including those in the Bitcoin and cryptocurrency industry, based on reputational risks or political motivations. This provision reinforces the principle that decisions about financial services should rely on risk-based analysis of individual accounts rather than blanket biases against entire industries. By codifying such protections, the SAFER Banking Act would promote fairness and transparency in financial services, ensuring that regulators adhere to their duties of impartial oversight while respecting the rights of businesses operating legally under state or federal law.
In addition to legislative solutions, the presence of even one bank with the willingness and capability to resist undue regulatory pressure could dramatically reshape the financial landscape for Bitcoin businesses. Caitlin Long’s Custodia Bank, based in Wyoming, exemplifies this potential. Custodia has consistently demonstrated its commitment to operating within the law while challenging the overreach of federal regulators, as seen in its lawsuit against the Federal Reserve.
A bank with this level of resolve, direct access to the Federal Reserve itself, and a proven track record of standing up to regulators will provide a lifeline for Bitcoin (and other) businesses seeking reliable financial services. By fostering an ecosystem where lawful businesses can thrive without fear of arbitrary debanking, Custodia Bank offers a template for how other institutions might follow suit, ensuring that innovation and economic freedom remain protected.1
Taken together, the SAFER Banking Act and the perseverance of institutions like Custodia Bank represent two critical fronts in the fight against financial discrimination. While the SAFER Act provides a legislative framework to curtail regulatory overreach and protect lawful businesses from debanking, it has faced significant resistance, having been introduced multiple times in Congress only to be repeatedly blocked. Meanwhile, Custodia Bank’s struggle underscores the severity of institutional hostility; the Federal Reserve’s refusal to grant Custodia access to the banking system forced the bank to file a federal lawsuit just to claim its rightful place in the financial ecosystem. These challenges highlight the entrenched opposition to reform, but they also emphasize the urgent need for a multi-pronged strategy—legislative, judicial, and entrepreneurial—to ensure fair and impartial access to banking services for all lawful businesses.
Bitcoiners: The Frontline of Freedom
Bitcoin isn’t just money; it’s an idea—an idea that money and power belong to the people, not the state. This is why we’re here. This is why Bitcoin exists. The legacy financial system is crumbling under its own corruption, and every act of suppression only underscores the need for decentralized alternatives.
To be clear, I don’t fully blame Mercury and Evolve for this. They’re likely being forced into it by their regulators.2 Indeed, due to the Orwellian Bank Secrecy Act, the banks aren’t allowed to disclose the reasons for these matters to the affected customers. Banks like Mercury, and any others who have willingly cooperated with Chokepoint 2.0 should be subject to Congressional Subpoenas to explain themselves, and also name-and-shame the regulators who coopted them.
The future of Bitcoin—and America’s role as a leader in innovation—depends on exposing and dismantling Chokepoint 2.0, and holding all those who participated in it accountable.
1 Of course, Custodia Bank having a master account doesn’t eliminate the possibility of governmental censorship, but it does force it to be direct and open, rather than the indirect, hidden, and unappealable route the regulators can take now. See this x-post by Caitlin Long.
2 Another reason to believe that, in the case of Mercury and Evolve, the regulators are responsible, is that Evolve Bank was penalized in June 2024 by the Federal Reserve, and likely forced into these actions by their overreaching and overreactive regulators as part of that penalty.
This is a guest post by Colin Crossman. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
Why regulators must be held accountable for the consequences of Operation Chokepoint 2.0.
Bitcoin is closing out one of its most remarkable months in history, surging over $30,000 in November and marking a renewed bullish sentiment in the market. As we look ahead to December and beyond, investors are eager to understand whether Bitcoin’s momentum can sustain itself into 2025. With macroeconomic conditions, historical trends, and on-chain data aligning in Bitcoin’s favor, let’s analyze what’s happening and what it could mean for the future.
November’s Record-Breaking Performance
November 2024 wasn’t just any month for Bitcoin; it was historic. Bitcoin’s price rose from around $67,000 to nearly $100,000, an approximate 50% peak-to-trough increase, making it the best-performing month ever in terms of dollar increase. This rally rewarded long-term holders who endured months of consolidation after Bitcoin’s all-time high of $74,000 earlier in the year.
Historically, Q4 is Bitcoin’s strongest quarter, and November has often been a standout month. December, which has also performed well in past bull cycles, presents a promising outlook. But as with any rally, some short-term cooling might be expected.
The Role of the Dollar and Global Liquidity
Interestingly, Bitcoin’s rise occurred against the backdrop of a strengthening U.S. Dollar Strength Index (DXY), a scenario that typically sees Bitcoin underperforming. Historically, Bitcoin and the DXY have maintained an inverse relationship: when the dollar strengthens, Bitcoin weakens, and vice versa.
Similarly, the Global M2 money supply, another key metric, has shown a slight contraction recently. Bitcoin has historically correlated positively with global liquidity; thus, its current performance defies expectations. If liquidity conditions improve in the coming months, this could act as a powerful tailwind for Bitcoin’s price.
Parallels to Past Bull Cycles
Bitcoin’s current trajectory is strikingly similar to past bull markets, particularly the 2016–2017 cycle. That cycle began with gradual price increases before breaking key resistance levels and entering an exponential growth phase.
In 2017, Bitcoin’s price broke out from a key technical level of around $1,000, leading to a parabolic rally that peaked at $20,000, a 20x increase. Similarly, the 2020-2021 cycle saw Bitcoin rise from $20,000 to nearly $70,000 after breaking above the crucial YoY Performance threshold.
If Bitcoin can break out decisively from this historic level and above the key $100,000 resistance, we may witness a repeat of these explosive price movements as BTC enters its exponential phase of bullish price action.
Institutional Adoption and Accumulation
A key factor underpinning Bitcoin’s strength is the continued accumulation by institutions. Bitcoin ETFs are adding billions of dollars worth of BTC to their holdings, and corporations like MicroStrategy have doubled down on their Bitcoin strategy, now holding close to 400,000 BTC. Even with BTC rallying to new all-time highs, ‘smart money’ is scrambling to accumulate as much as possible to ensure they’re not left behind.
This institutional demand indicates growing confidence in Bitcoin as a long-term store of value, even in volatile market conditions. Such accumulation also tightens the available supply, creating upward pressure on prices as demand increases.
Conclusion
While December has historically been a strong month for Bitcoin, short-term volatility could temper gains as the market digests November’s sharp rally. Although given the aggressive accumulation we’re witnessing from institutional participants anything is possible.
Longer-term, however, the outlook remains exceptionally bullish. The obvious level to watch is $100,000 as the next major milestone, which, if breached, could pave the way for a much larger rally in 2025. Bitcoin is entering one of its most exciting phases yet, with the stars seemingly aligning across macroeconomic, technical, and on-chain metrics.
For a more in-depth look into this topic, check out a recent YouTube video here: The BIGGEST Bitcoin Month EVER – So What Happens Next?
🎁 Black Friday: Our Biggest Ever Sale
The BEST saving of the year is here. Get 40% Off all our annual plans.
- Unlock +100 Bitcoin charts.
- Access Indicator alerts – so you never miss a thing.
- Private TradingView indicators of your favorite Bitcoin charts.
- Members-only Reports and Insights.
- Many new charts and features coming soon.
All for just $15/month with the Black Friday deal. This is our biggest sale all year.
UPGRADE YOUR BITCOIN INVESTING NOW
Don’t miss out! 👉 https://www.bitcoinmagazinepro.com/subscribe/
From Historic Gains to Future Growth: What the November Bitcoin Price Breakthrough Means for Investors in December.
Don’t Sell MicroStrategy Your Bitcoin
The ‘Wild, Wild West’ of the American Egg Donor Industry Rina Raphael
Debanked: The Financial Suppression of Bitcoin Businesses Must End
This is What Happens When You Try to Report Dirty Cops
THE IRON-CLAD PIÑATA Seymour Hersh
The Russell Brand Rorschach Test Kathleen Stock
RARE VIDEO: 1987 DC Hearing – NBC Warns Against Removing Fairness Doctrine – Learn Why It Matters
WATCH: CSPAN Caller Call Out the Resending of the Smith-Mundt Act – Learn Why That’s IMPORTANT
WATCH: 1975 Church Comitee Hearings on the CIA Mockingbird Media
-
Awakening Video1 year agoThis is What Happens When You Try to Report Dirty Cops
-
Substacks9 months agoTHE IRON-CLAD PIÑATA Seymour Hersh
-
Substacks1 year agoThe Russell Brand Rorschach Test Kathleen Stock
-
Substacks1 year agoA real fact-check of Trump’s appearance on Meet the Press Judd Legum
-
Substacks1 year agoLetter to the Children of Gaza – Read by Eunice Wong Chris Hedges