Wilfredo Pagán

Drop Site News reports on breaking events with clear sourcing and careful attribution, distinguishing between verified information and claims made by governments or state-linked outlets. In the post at issue (linked below), the information was explicitly identified as coming from Iranian state-linked media and framed as a claim, consistent with our standard editorial practice. Our coverage applies the same approach across all actors, including the United States, Israel, and Iran. In fast-moving conflicts, competing narratives are part of the story, and documenting what each side is saying is essential to understanding how events are being framed and interpreted in real time. As Drop Site reporter Ryan Grim wrote, “anybody who reads our Twitter feed knows that we regularly report official and semi-official statements… Our readers have enough sense not to believe everything every government says, but they do want to know what they’re saying in real time. Other readers, those not interested in knowing what governments adversarial to the U.S. are saying, have endless options to choose from, but we’re not one of them.” We do not limit our reporting to Western or allied sources. Providing visibility into claims made by all sides, with proper attribution, is a core part of our editorial approach. Regarding the reporting at issue, some have accused Drop Site of “promoting” Iranian propaganda for noting that U.S. forces were reportedly bombing areas where a missing airman was believed to be located. That element of the reporting, which we were among the first to surface, was later borne out by subsequent disclosures. Prior to that, we also reported information from journalist Jack Murphy—a U.S. military veteran—who said the recovery had been successful, with clear attribution. Our role is to provide audiences with the information needed to assess developments as they unfold. We do not withhold information from our audience merely because it comes from a source adversarial to the U.S. government, nor do we tell readers what to think. If this is the kind of journalism you think the world needs, link to subscribe is in our bio.

A Trump insider opened a $51,000,000 oil short position — hours before Trump announced a ceasefire with Iran. This guy is now 16 for 16. $170 million in profit. A perfect streak. This is not a talented trader. "We placed the bet." "The ceasefire dropped." "We cashed out." Sixteen times in a row. That is not skill. That is not instinct. That is not research. That is someone who knows what is coming before it comes. Think about what that actually means. A private individual is placing a $51 million bet that oil prices are about to collapse — hours before a sitting president announces a ceasefire that collapses oil prices. Not once. Sixteen times. Zero losses. There are only two explanations and both should terrify you. Either someone inside the White House — or with direct access to it — is leaking ceasefire negotiations to traders before diplomats, before the press, before the American people hear a single word. That is insider trading. That is corruption. That is a federal crime. Or the timing of the announcement itself is being shaped around the trade. Which is worse. This is not a genius investor who reads the news faster than you do. The news hadn't happened yet. He wasn't reading the news. He was getting a phone call. While Americans were watching the ceasefire announcement and feeling relieved — somebody already knew. Somebody had already bet $51 million on it. And somebody was already counting their winnings. You are not watching a free market. You are watching a White House with a side hustle. Via~ Really American

Just imagine the absolute meltdown on Fox News if President Obama said “Praise be to Allah” on Easter