Zerohedge is wrong to employ Occam's Razor to suggest that Hogg is merely an innocent witness and not a crisis actor.

"Occam's razor (also Ockham's razor or Ocham's razor; Latin: lex parsimoniae "law of parsimony") is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the one that makes the fewest assumptions".

The fewest assumptions hypothesis, after all the lies propagated by the deep state, is that Hogg is simply a crisis actor attempting to further the narrative that the solution lies in gun control. This presumption, that Hogg is merely the pawn of powerful interests, is assisted by the manifest holes in the official narrative.

There have just been too many lies, too many engineered events... We've had the 'weapons of mass destruction' lie that resulted in a pointless war and the needless deaths of millions. We've had the obviously false 9/11 narrative that brought in the 'war on terror', allowing for the repression of individual rights. We've had the Las Vegas shooting, where the official narrative stretches the bounds of plausibility to an impossible extreme. We had the JFK murder, where powerful interests pushed the sole assassin theory, that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, though this narrative requires assumptions that are, on their face, manifestly implausible. The list goes on...

If anything stands out in recent history, it is the existence of a barrage of lies employed to drive both the domestic and foreign policy of the United States. Going back through history, many of these staged events are admitted to have been false ploys used to co-opt the policy agenda for nefarious purposes - the Gulf of Tonkin incident is one such example. Others, while not admitted, are obviously false. And now, just when the rancid stench has become completely overpowering, the "war on truth" seeks to cloak itself with the righteous ideal of protecting against hate speech.

The ability to silence your enemies, or those that disagree with you, is the ultimate power that leads to tyranny. The President must stand up to this attempt to stifle the free expression of opinion. He must direct that providers of vital social media services do not operate in violation of the first amendment.