Corporate Media Targets RFK Jr.’s Wife

In a recent development, the corporate state media has launched a smear campaign against Cheryl Hines, wife of RFK Jr., aiming to exploit her connections in Hollywood and sow marital discord. With articles like “Cheryl Hines Is Now an Anti-Vax Soldier for Her Husband, RFK Jr.,” the media is attempting to tarnish RFK Jr.’s reputation.

While Kennedy is running as a Democrat, his controversial views on various political issues and association with Tucker Carlson raise concerns among voters who may recognize his last name without knowing the extent of his “dangerous ideas.”

Kennedy’s stance against 5G technology, surveillance, and his belief that certain drugs are responsible for gun violence and school shootings have been widely publicized. He has also been an outspoken critic of vaccines, founding the World Mercury Project, a nonprofit advocating against vaccines for children.

Cheryl Hines, in a recent interview, acknowledged the two sides of the vaccine debate, emphasizing the importance of thorough testing and questioning their overall safety. Hines, known for her acting career, finds herself in an unfamiliar spotlight due to her marriage to a prominent political figure.

As RFK Jr. faces criticism for his anti-vaccine crusade and promotion of conspiracy theories, her beliefs on vaccines remain undisclosed. The New York Times highlights the significance of Hines’ role in softening RFK Jr.’s public image and countering the negative perception stemming from his views.

Critics accuse Kennedy of promoting false narratives, such as the claim that Bill Gates supports vaccines for financial gain. When questioned about an endorsement from an individual who propagated the conspiracy theory that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax, Kennedy remained silent.

Speculations arise about the media’s bias, particularly regarding Bill Gates, as the Gates Foundation’s significant investment in Moderna mRNA injections comes to light. The articles against RFK Jr. paint his positions as dangerous without clear justifications, and a free society should allow opposing viewpoints to be debated openly rather than suppressing them.

The media’s simultaneous dismissal and vilification of Kennedy’s views only serve to fuel curiosity. Understanding why his ideas are considered “dangerous” by the corporate state power structure is essential, regardless of personal support or opposition to him.