Search

Javier Tebas wrote that the events of October 18 confirmed his earlier accusations against Real Madrid. He recalled that on October 16 he named the journalist from "El Debate," Tomás González-Martín, as the spokesperson for the club's management narrative. On the same day, Real responded with a statement in which, as reported by Tebas, they distanced themselves from the opinions of journalists outside the club. Tebas claimed that he asked Real to deny the comparison to Negreira that the journalist allegedly attributed to club sources, as well as allegations that La Liga was harming the club regarding the scheduling of matches. He also demanded the publication of all of Real’s requests for changes to the schedule and information on how many of them were considered. According to Tebas, on October 18, Real Madrid TV attacked him again, and a section of fans coordinated and supervised by the club displayed a banner with the slogan "Tebas and Negreira." He asked whether the club would also present this as an opinion unrelated to Real. He also accused the management of inciting hostility among fans toward specific individuals; he cited an earlier warning that the club had set Real fans against him and prevented him from moving freely on the street. Tebas accused the management of manipulating the message and spreading false information. He also referred to Real's publication from October 17 about "international media": he stated that the materials from Reuters, BBC, and "L’Équipe," repeated by the club, indicated that it was Real who requested them, and presenting the press reports as support for the club was manipulation. He added that his questions about sources, accusations, and the schedule had remained unanswered since October 16. #RealMadrid #LaLiga #Tebas (translated)

He assessed that the France he knew might be coming to an end, and the scale of riots, looting, and arson had exceeded all limits. He criticized the media for portraying the protesters as students dissatisfied with reforms, describing this narrative as "sick." He claimed that it was known who was behind these events and why, and warned against repeating the same mistake. #Francja #protesty #zamieszki (translated)

Piotr Kusznieruk wrote that the revealed recordings raised questions about the reason for the police check on the man who was, as he suggested, connected to the protest. According to his reconstruction, the officers followed the man for several dozen meters, demanded his personal information without providing a specific reason for the check, and then incapacitated him inside the building. Kusznieruk noted that the man pushed the officers away and fled inside, but he believed that this did not explain the earlier decision to conduct a check. The author claimed that the man lost consciousness during the intervention, and the knife found with him was not presented as having been used. He also questioned the proportionality of the force used and whether the man deliberately attacked the policewoman when the window broke. Furthermore, he described that several hours later, the detained man was informed that he could meet with lawyer Magdalena Leszczyńska if he provided his details. According to Kusznieruk, the man did not know the lawyer and did not want to see her, while the police considered this a refusal to contact a defense attorney. Kusznieruk also criticized the statement by Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who — as he wrote — linked the matter to President Nawrocki. He asked whether the police acted on the orders of superiors, collected data on demonstration participants, and previously observed the man. He directed questions to the Polish Police and the Ministry of Interior and Administration regarding who ordered the identification of Piotr and on what basis. He warned that if the identification of protesters occurred without legal grounds, it could mean using the state apparatus to control citizens. #Polska #Policja #protesty (translated)

Monika Zła assessed that instead of a substantive discussion about the country's future, viewers saw a performance that caused embarrassment. She criticized the interlocutor's body language, considering it dismissive, as well as his chaotic rhetoric and difficulties in articulating thoughts fluidly. She also wrote that he repeated worn-out slogans and failed to present a modern perspective or solutions for citizens, focusing instead on a political dispute with the government. #polityka #dyskusja #media (translated)

The author criticized Szefernaker's post, stating that instead of calming emotions, it served political mobilization. He pointed out that Szefernaker began with the story of a voter who traveled half of Poland to cast his vote for him, and then — as the author put it — presented Donald Tusk as an unscrupulous salesman, Poland as a state of chaos and high prices, and suggested a political nature to the accusations and arrests. The author also noted the announcement to remove Tusk's government from power within a year. He emphasized that Szefernaker wrote as the head of the Chancellery of the President of the Republic of Poland, while also reminding of his role in Karol Nawrocki's campaign, whom he referred to as a civic candidate. The author accused the Presidential Chancellery and politicians associated with Nawrocki of inconsistency: on one hand, they were supposed to call for an end to political war and calm the mood, while on the other hand — according to the author — they were stoking conflict, presenting government decisions as threats, and mobilizing voters against it. In this context, he recalled statements from Bogucki and Nawrocki about the need to ease tensions. The author noted that the efficiency of the state is not measured solely by the number of accusations or arrests, but added that it should not also depend on whether those in power are protected from responsibility. He assessed that merely labeling the accusations as political does not prove that they had such a nature and announced that he would remind of earlier statements every time the Presidential Chancellery calls for an end to the political conflict. #Polska #Polityka #Emocje (translated)

The author wrote that the President of Ukraine connected attacks on Yandex data centers with the activity of Russian trolls on the internet. He cited the latest analyses by experts, according to which this activity has not decreased, and wondered whether it was about a Ukrainian narrative that the president had also succumbed to. https://t.co/rmKaZSHcjd #Ukraina #dezinformacja #media #UA #RU (translated)

Max Hübner claimed that Donald Tusk's revelation of information about the "threat of an attack" was meant to stage, as he put it, an embarrassing scene involving Pawlicka and Kierwiński on TVP. He described a conversation in which Pawlicka asked whether the president would sign the law after the threat, and Kierwiński was supposed to point out that he had not done so earlier and that under social pressure he signed the fuel law. Hübner added that the interlocutors expressed hope that it would be similar this time. The author accused them of failing to see that their narrative did not hold up. He wrote that the interview took place a few hours after the information about the attack was revealed, and by that time nearly all of Poland had ridiculed it. #Polska #Tusk #media (translated)

Max Hübner described the government's narrative as "full of holes" and accused it of exploiting tragedy to push through a censorship law. He pointed to Gawkowski's statements: first, he was supposed to inform about the immediate blocking of accounts, and a minute later say that a law is needed to block such content and that the government expects it to be signed by the president. https://t.co/SW6JsB20HI #Cenzura #Polityka #WolnośćSłowa (translated)

The author described the information about the plans to assassinate the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of the Polish government as frightening. He accused individuals whom he identified as being connected to PiS of having harassed, mocked, and trivialized these reports. He added that the Russian narrative had deprived them of empathy. #Polska #hejt #bezpieczeństwo #PL #RU (translated)

The author recalled the confusion surrounding the drones that were supposed to enter Poland and were allegedly Russian. He wrote that this was accompanied by alarms, fear, and a narrative of a Russian attack, as well as an atmosphere of an approaching war. He added that a few days earlier, the prosecution had closed the investigation without identifying the perpetrators. https://t.co/LYejGsORkt #Polska #wojna #drony #PL #RU (translated)

Filip Modrzejewski wrote that Jan Urban should be fired for reasons more serious than the results: in his opinion, the coach did not believe in the team and accepted its current situation. Modrzejewski assessed that even if Urban accurately described the potential of the team, such words did not help it build. He considered this narrative to be an alibi for the lack of a clear concept and intense searching, and dismissed the call for patience, arguing that the coach himself did not believe in the process. #JanUrban #piłkaNożna #wyniki (translated)

Alicja Defratyka criticized the narrative of PiS, PiS bis, and Confederation regarding the price of gasoline being 5.19 PLN per liter. She wrote that expecting such a price was, in her opinion, as absurd as assuming that bread, cold cuts, energy, or apartments would cost the same or less than in 2022, when Donald Tusk spoke about 5.19 PLN. #Polska #benzyna #ceny (translated)

The author of the entry accused Przydacz of first claiming that he could not personally check fuel prices at Orlen stations abroad, and then, an hour later, providing historical and current barrel oil prices converted to zlotys. He suggested that internet access during the G20 summit allowed him to obtain this data. The author assessed that Przydacz focused on oil prices, although—he wrote—fuel prices are also influenced by refinery product prices, the dollar exchange rate, margins, logistics, supply, as well as taxes and fees. He pointed out that the government lowered VAT on fuels from 23% to 8%, and the excise duty by 29 gr per liter of gasoline and 28 gr per liter of diesel. According to the entry, this was supposed to reduce the price by about 1.2–1.3 zlotys per liter; he added that Wojcik calculated this well. The author questioned referring to Donald Tusk's statements from 2022 and the price of 5.19 zlotys. He believed that the entire market conditions of 2022 and 2026 should have been compared, not just barrel oil prices. He also accused Przydacz of prioritizing stirring emotions, manipulating public opinion, and dividing society over providing accurate information. #Polska #paliwo #G20 (translated)

Zurek turned into a troll from Giertych: "I saw a confused president for the first time, because just as he was arrogant in various appearances... maybe he had less snus yesterday, he was different, jittery." The guy is the Minister of Justice, and the narrative is worthy of Strong Together... https://t.co/xr2EGXgDRX #polityka #Giertych #Żurek (translated)

We have a government today that deceives and blackmails Poles, and its entire narrative around this law has been a lie from the beginning. Donald Tusk's cabinet has all the tools to lower fuel prices – it could have done this yesterday, a week, or a month ago. The government will not lower prices based on the law signed by the President from day to day. It comes into effect on November 1st, and the first payments from the new levy will only enter the budget by November 25th. For fuel to become cheaper immediately, the government simply needs to lower taxes. The President made a very responsible decision by signing this regulation and sending it to the Tribunal for subsequent control. Otherwise, citizens would continue to bear the costs of the government's previous deceptions. When the Minister of Finance wants to introduce tax privileges for same-sex couples, a simple tax interpretation suffices – suddenly the law becomes unnecessary, even though it contradicts Article 18 of the Constitution. Since it was possible to act with one administrative decision in that matter, why weren't taxes lowered to relieve Poles paying for the high prices at gas stations, which directly drives inflation? The government has repeatedly shown that it can act without the President's approval. A politician must be responsible, especially when holding the most important position in the state. A country is not governed with a baseball bat – a country is governed with responsibility. And it is from this responsibility that every decision of the President arises. The slogan "Poland first, Poles first" is not an empty statement. It is a concrete task for this presidency. Donald Tusk came to power on an election lie, claiming that with one decision from the Prime Minister, fuel could cost 5.19 PLN. Today he has become a hostage to his own promise. Many Poles believed him, so this promise should be fulfilled – regardless of whether he himself believed in it then or not. This is not the first time he has deceived Poles. Full responsibility for fuel prices rests with the government, for it is the government that has the tools to influence their height. Today, after the law was signed by the President, there are no more excuses or claims that the head of state is blocking anything. The President and the Chancellery of the President of the Republic of Poland will not participate in the political theater of Prime Minister Donald Tusk. The President consistently implements his strategy: he signs what serves the citizens and blocks poor solutions. We will not allow attention to be diverted from the key problems of Poles: fuel prices, energy, and the cost of living. Since the first day of his term, the President has been advocating for the establishment of American military bases in Poland. This is a strategic foundation of our security, and no excuses from the government will be accepted in this matter. The law clearly states that the President's opinion must be taken into account when appointing the leadership of the SOP. We are open to dialogue, but key decisions regarding the security of the most important people in the country must be worked out together with the President. #Polska #rząd #paliwo (translated)

I understand that you are not an economist, but after all, you have an entire army of "advisors" at your disposal... Because this is no longer information relayed by Moody. This is your RHETORIC. Just like with the debt. "In four years, the government increases debt by a trillion." The thing is, four years have not yet passed 🤷‍♂️ You are already linking the executed debt with a FUTURE FORECAST and then dividing that amount by the number of residents, announcing that a newborn has "26 thousand zł of debt." How do you come to such absurd conclusions?? I won't say it's not impressive... But public debt is not a personal obligation that is assigned to a child's account. And then there's the Constitutional Tribunal. You sign a law, still consider it unconstitutional, and send it to the Tribunal. The same Tribunal that the ECtHR has found to violate the right to a court set by law in the Xero Flor case, and the Grand Chamber of the CJEU in case C-448/23 stated that it does not meet the requirement of an independent and impartial court due to serious irregularities concerning its composition. And just minutes earlier, you said: "I'm not looking at legal loopholes." The Constitution and the legality of state organs are not "legal loopholes," Mr. Guardian of the Constitution 🤦‍♂️ And in the end, you say that you don't want "constant political war"... After a speech in which words fall: - blackmail, - the government’s ATM, - the government's financial catastrophe, - the prime minister's political plan and unsubstantiated claims that the government deliberately maintains high fuel prices to profit from them. I won't judge intentions. I assess the content. And the content of the official statement by the person holding the highest office in the state should withstand confrontation with documents 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ Here - in many key areas - it does not withstand. I will no longer dwell on this speech, as I believe it is a waste of time. I'll just say this. I don't know who prepared this text for you. However, I do know that you read it, you delivered it, and you take responsibility for every word. And you repeated nonsense and manipulations that have long circulated in the statements of people from your Chancellery — which I have already corrected multiple times. The worst part is that many of them don't even take long to verify. You just need to open the documents from your own Chancellery. I really don't envy you. It only pains me your slogan: "First Poland, first Poles." Because Poland and Poles should truly come first - even before political interests, party narratives, and the need for another conflict. You cannot appeal to the good of citizens while simultaneously playing with their trust in the state, providing them from the highest office with half-truths, insinuations, and political assessments cloaked as facts. This is not about whether someone likes this government. It's about accountability for words. Especially from this office 🫣 #Polska #Polityka #Ekonomia (translated)

Mr. Nawrocki, Unfortunately, I listened to this hmmm "message" and checked it against the documents. And, as usual, I have a problem. A big one. Because when you set aside the gestures, the teleprompter, and the political phrases, what remains is a series of facts mixed with half-truths, altered chronology, forecasts presented as certainties, and accusations that are not even confirmed by the documents of your own Office and a mass of other manipulations. Step by step. "The campaign promise of fuel at 5.19." No. Mr. Donald Tusk’s specific statement about 5.19 PLN was made in JUNE 2022. Parliamentary elections were scheduled for August 8, 2023. Only then did the election campaign begin in the sense of the Electoral Code. But it gets much more interesting with your quote... In the message, you connected 5.19 PLN, "one simple decision," and... a VAT reduction 🤦‍♂️ However, in the original statement about 5.19, Tusk talked about the MARGINS of Orlen and Lotos. And in a later statement about "one decision," he also talked about limiting Orlen's profits. Not about VAT! 🤦‍♂️ You are manipulating the Prime Minister's statement, and you are using the institution of the Address to the Nation for that... Exactly the same version about VAT was spread by Mr. Bogucki in the morning, but in his case, nothing surprises me anymore. A coincidence? Let’s move on. You claim that your project would cause "an immediate drop in fuel prices of over 2 PLN." Meanwhile, your OWN justification explicitly states that the mechanism DOES NOT START when the law comes into force. First, specific market conditions must occur. Then the Council of Ministers MAY issue a regulation. Only then does the mechanism begin to work. Where is the "immediate" here? Did you read your "own" project? Or are you just repeating this nonsense from Mr. Przydacz? Moreover, earlier materials from KPRP talked about an ESTIMATE of 1.70–2.60 PLN 🤦‍♂️ In the address, the estimate has already turned into a guaranteed effect 🤦‍♂️ Next, you say that the project is "good for the budget"... Meanwhile, your own justification predicts a loss of up to 600 million PLN just from the retail sales tax and further, unestimated costs of any potential excise tax reduction. I ask again - did you read your own project? Because you probably didn’t write it manually... Even more interesting. In the address: "The government bears full responsibility for fuel prices." In the justification of your project: market disruptions have an "objective character and are independent of entrepreneurs and the government".... So please decide. Full responsibility of the government or factors independent of the government? Because both versions cannot be true at the same time 🤦‍♂️ "The Marshal of the Sejm freezes the project." The project was submitted on September 18. On the same day, it was directed to the Legislative Office and BEOS. Then for opinions and consultations. Moreover, KPRP talked about the possibility of "freezing" as early as September 17 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ THE DAY BEFORE THE PROJECT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE SEJM! So first, a narrative about freezing was created, and only later did the Marshal receive the bill 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ Are you communicating with the rest of the "experts" in your office?? Next, we hear that the government deliberately keeps prices high because it wants to profit from VAT and dividends from Orlen. Proof? None was provided! A higher price may mean higher nominal VAT revenues. Orlen can pay dividends to shareholders. But one does not imply the other: this is NOT proof that the government deliberately keeps fuel prices high. This is attributing a motive without providing evidence 🤦‍♂️ Then you sign the law and say: "Every zloty obtained from this law must be spent on reducing fuel prices." A moment earlier, you conceded that the law DOES NOT CONTAIN a mechanism for passing that money on to reduce prices 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ Exactly. So it "mustn't." This is your political demand, not the legal effect of the signed law 🤷‍♂️ Moody’s? Yes. Here, the fact is a fact: Poland's rating was lowered from A2 to A3. But why was there no information that at the same time, the outlook was changed from negative to STABLE? Why does the rating decision then create a vision that "tomorrow there may not be enough for pensions and armaments"? #Polska #Polityka #Fakty (translated)

#InfoAlert! Officially, Russia declares its desire to conclude peace regarding Ukraine and supports a ceasefire. However, this is contradicted not only by the ongoing intelligence war conducted by Russian special services but also by the recent propaganda narrative circulated by the Kremlin. https://t.co/UsNPv9xNbK #Rosja #Ukraina #pokój #RU #UA (translated)