What the heck is going on when US Strategic Command not only has a Twitter account, but re-tweets Breitbart effing dot com?
After quite the backlash, this is their weak excuse:
"US Strategic Command uses social media and web tools to inform the public about its missions, people and activities. We routinely repurpose stories of interest via social media that contain factual and accurate information about the command and its missile sets. Our policy is that we do not endorse, nor discriminate against, any particular news organization."
There is no doubt that the purpose of Strategic Command's Twitter page is to speak to a very specific audience. Military contractors and members of Congress on appropriation sub-committees. It's about getting their sugar funded -- and that's why they linked Breitbart. I would bet any article that specifically recommends spending on their stuff gets considered...and maybe it was an arranged quid pro quo. We'll write about this and you tweet it so Congress knows there's "buzz" about the need for funding. Maybe that's even what Bannon is doing in his spare time.
Come to think of it, maybe Crooks and Liars should try advocating for massive military spending increases so we can get all that sweet, sweet, Stratcom traffic here!
Nevermind.
The opinion on Twitter is overwhelming that a US Military spokes-twitter should discriminate between a legitimate news source and Breitbart.
And then there's this theory:
Link Breitbart? Don't link Breitbart? Hey, I've got a solution!
