NYT op-ed piece was written against POTUS, but the author is being called a “coward” and other names because he is anonymous.

Not everyone who works in anonymity is a coward, even though that one is. His anonymity is not entirely what makes him a coward. If he truly believed in what he wrote, he would have the integrity to find a job working for a boss he respected, not one he was trying to overthrow by sedition. He uses anonymity to hide that cowardice.

Autists (God bless you all!) use their anonymity for another reason—and it is not for cowardice. No money, no fame. That distinction cannot be lost. There is a time and place for anonymity. Just as there is a time and place for investigating, even making, conspiracy theories and testing them, researching to see if they are true.

Obama said Republicans have “embraced wild conspiracy theories, like those surrounding Benghazi.” Now why was that so important for him to say that? Kris Paronto responded in his typical no-hold-barred style. Twitter suspended him for it. Paronto was out of line for responding to Obama?

Why should Twitter pounce on Paronto like that? Was it the Alex Jones effect? Was Twitter saying “No support for conspiracy theories at all, and we really, really mean it!”? I wonder.

Putting it together… Anonymous = cowardly = conspiracy theories = Qanon

Is that the next line of attack?

https://twitter.com/KrisParonto/status/1038816557995106304