> In a roughly 10-minute video captioned "Ep.1" he claimed without evidence that Ukraine was to blame for the destruction of a massive dam in Russian-occupied territory that caused widespread flooding.
So not really new.
Interesting. When you consider he may be a Russian asset, and that's a significant revenue source, his decision to be on Twitter makes more sense. He can combine both revenue streams and make ends meet. I doubt Twitter alone can pay his staff, production, make it worth it for himself. Especially for him to just end up peddling Kremlin's talking points. Totally by accident, of course.
The last straw for me. I’m not partaking in that place as long as these sort of awful people are actively promoted.