Skip to content
Breaking News Alert Report: Trump Rally Assassin Hid Gun On Site Before The Event

Here Are All The Twitter Blue Checks Who Advocated For Regime Change In Russia

Image CreditCBS News/YouTube

Twitter blue checks and the corporate media say that toppling Putin’s regime, even if it means escalation, should be our official stance.


President Joe Biden advocated for regime change in Russia this week, but before his administration could soften his statement, plenty of people consulted by the corporate media to speak about the overseas crisis as “experts” agreed with the president’s original comments.

“For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power,” Biden declared about Vladimir Putin during his formal speech in Warsaw, Poland.

The corporate press called the outburst a “gaffe” to cover for Biden, who couldn’t decide between standing by his comments or downplaying them as simple “moral outrage” toward Putin. While the president flip-flopped, the White House scrambled to paint Biden’s bold statement as a mistake and quickly clarified that the sitting president of the United States was not, in fact, calling for regime change in Russia.

Even Biden’s eventual insistence that “nobody believes I was talking about taking down Putin,” however, was contradicted and undermined by Twitter blue checkmarks, talking heads, and the corrupt corporate media, who say that toppling Putin’s regime, even if it means escalation, should be the U.S. government’s official stance.

In addition to trying unsuccessfully to compare Biden’s off-script declaration to President Ronald Reagan’s iconic “tear down this wall” charge, multiple warmongers tried to justify Biden’s radical regime-change remark with their own reasoning about how bad Putin is.

“Did Biden’s Gaffe About Putin Contain a Kernel of Truth?” one headline in the New York Magazine’s Intelligencer stated.

“Biden’s Putin ad lib wasn’t a gaffe. He was right,” The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson wrote.

“Biden’s support for Ukraine and opposition to Putin were no ‘gaffe,’” Max Boot argued in the opinion pages of The Washington Post.

National Review’s senior editorial staff also collectively argued that while Biden’s comments were a “mistake,” they invoked an “understandable sentiment.”

“It will come as no surprise to Vladimir Putin that the U.S. would prefer to see someone else in charge in the Kremlin. And the U.S. is right to want this,” the article lede states.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul made several corporate media appearances following Biden’s comments where he argued that Biden wasn’t calling for regime change but that there’s nothing wrong with expressing that “Putin should not be in power.”

“Millions of people agree with the President of the United States, including millions of Russians,” McFaul said on MSNBC. “Every time we mention this moment, let’s remember that Vladimir Putin is not just saying things like Mr. Zelenskyy shouldn’t be in power. He has invaded Ukraine to try to do regime change there.”

One day earlier, McFaul tweeted that “Biden expressed what billions around the world and millions inside Russia also believe.”


Several different rationales were used to justify calling for Putin’s removal including labeling the drastic action as “basic humanity.”

Others such as disgraced Lincoln Project co-founder Rick Wilson parroted the Russia collusion hoax as justification for considering U.S.-backed regime overthrow in Russia.

One Daily Beast columnist joined Wilson in hinting that it might be okay to escalate the overseas crisis in the name of replacing Putin because the Russian head “sought to effect regime change here in the United States– as our entirely intel and law enforcement community concluded.”

Other Biden allies didn’t quite call for Putin’s assassination, as Sen. Lindsey Graham did a few weeks ago, but they did express approval for finding ways to get rid of Putin.